We The People - Constitutional Conventions

Subscribe thank You https://www.youtube.com/@constitutionalconventions6240 Subscribe to We the People Constitutional Conventions on Rumble https://rumble.com/c/c-1516344 Subscribe to Constitutional Conventions on Rumble https://rumble.com/user/ConstitutionalConventions Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 https://rumble.com/v4govwc-facts-vs-fiction-know-who-owns-the-land-not-canada-or-their-corrup-peice-of.html info@ConstitutionalConventions.ca https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1osxH54JPkk

Subscribe https://www.youtube.com/@constitutionalconventions6240 - to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 Hello This Thursday March 21st 1 PM Est - WE are on the Agenda at the District of Muskoka Community Committee meeting with my Rebuttal on the Climate Change Emergency. This is the first time we are addressing our Regional government which has all six municipalities , all six Mayors and 18 District Councillors If you go to their website you will see the full blown dedication to this hoax.. https://www.muskoka.on.ca/en/index.aspx This is a first for the District and I want to take the opportunity to present the full truth including the issues of lawful authority and jurisdiction wrapped in the Climate Change bow Please let me your thoughts, Love, Peggy

Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 https://rumble.com/v4govwc-facts-vs-fiction-know-who-owns-the-land-not-canada-or-their-corrup-peice-of.html A beneficiary is a person (or entity) who is designated to receive the benefits of property owned by someone else. https://www.ontario.ca/page/get-or-replace-ontario-birth-certificate CIPO online \https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/canadian-intellectual-property-office/en Alberta Live Birth Cerificate https://formsmgmt.gov.ab.ca/Public/DVS11163B.xdp BC Live Birth Order certificates and copies https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/life-events/order-certificates-copies Canadian Intellectual Property Office https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/canadian-intellectual-property-office/en B PROOF OF CLAIM A beneficiary is a person (or entity) who is designated to receive the benefits of property owned by someone else. Rights Doc. 4 WE are all born with free will and unalienable rights. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law’ Consent makes the contract Adhesion contracts are not contracts because there was no consent, they are considered as gifts. We do not require any corporate created rights, such as the Charter of Rights and Freedom provided by the Government of Canada Corporation and/or ICCPR provided by the United Nations Corporation. If anyone claims to have jurisdiction over, you and/or requests payment request a copy of the contract. Government Corporations Government Services Corporations doing business as Government of Canada and/or the government of any provinces can only create rules (statutes) that only apply to their employees, franchisees, officers and dependents. Their rules (statutes) do not apply to the people in general. That is why the rules they create (statutes) are referred to as “public policy”. We do not require any corporate created rights, such as the Charter of Rights and Freedom provided by the Government of Canada Corporation and/or ICCPR provided by the United Nations Corporation. Women and men living in Canada are not subject to any Public Policies, mandates, or acts of legislation promoted by any commercial or municipal corporation for its officers and employees. We should not vote in private corporate shareholder elections sponsored by Canada Inc., Province of _____ Inc., or any other foreign corporation. All Acts, Bills and statutes created by the Government of Canada and/or any of the provincial governments only apply to “person”. The definition of person in Black’s Law Dictionary Fifth Edition on page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being ( i.e. natural person ) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words, if I say the basket includes apples and oranges you will not find any other type of fruit in the basket. As plainly stated in Black’s Law dictionary, anything that applies to person only applies to a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Does not apply to men or women! The Government of Canada and Government of all provinces are Crown for profit Corporations. The Prime Minister and/or the Premiers receive their orders from the shareholders of the Crown Corporation. They are the C.E.O.s/officers of the Crown Corporations. They carry out the orders that are relayed to them by the Governor General and/or the Lieutenant Governor. They (politicians) are in place to take the blame for the harm that is done to the people. They are replaced every four years with someone who claims that he/she is going to right the wrongs that were created, but nothing changes they carry out the orders provided by the shareholders as the previous C.E.O.s. Four years later they are blamed and replaced. PERSONS All Acts, Bills and statutes created by the Government of Canada and/or any of the provincial governments only apply to “person”. The definition of person in Black’s Law Dictionary Fifth Edition on page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being (i.e. natural person ) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words, if I say the basket includes apples and oranges you will not find any other type of fruit in the basket. As plainly stated in Black’s Law dictionary, anything that applies to person only applies to a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Does not apply to men or women _________________________________________________________ Name written in all capital letters The governing book of the English language is “The Oxford Styles Manual” which sometimes refers to “The Chicago Manual of Style” also The Oxford Manual of Style. All Uppercase text, all caps, or gloss is listed in the style's manuals under “foreign - language” , named ”Ancient-Latin” or Dog Latin. All Caps are not defined or recognized in meaning. All Caps is not English although you may think you are able to read it as English it is in fact, a calculated deception to be read separated from the rest of the “Document”. All Uppercase text has no lawful grammatical jurisdiction with common English and is a foreign language, headed under “Ancient-Latin”. (The Chicago Manual of Style, 16th Edition, 11:144-47). Glossa is two or more languages on a legal document. Glossa is a poisonous gloss which corrupts the essence of a text( Black’s Law Dictionary page 621 5th Edition) “Glossa” is also used to conceal or confuse the real facts in order to confuse, in order to gain tacit consent. A name written in all capital letters is written in dog Latin or is known as systemic text “a thing” created by the employees of the crown corporation, Therefore the Crown Corporation owns the creation. If you claim that the name written in all capital letters, is, you. You are admitting you are the property of the Crown Corporation (a slave). Cestui Que Vie Trust 's beneficiary is the name in all capital letters which is the property of the Crown Corporation, it is not you. All governments (corporations) and businesses such as banks and others that write your name in all capital letters are committing constructive fraud and conversion. (Engaged in criminal activity) ___________________________________________________ City, Municipality, Village et al Address Date TO: Mayor, CAO, CEO, Councillors et al FROM: The men and women living therein, The enclosed documentation: 1) Proof of Incorporation of the following entities; from Dunn & Bradstreet or EDGAR Search U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Note: the following are government services corporations’ (dba( "doing business as,") Government of Canada, EDGAR (CIK 0000230098) ; Government of British Columbia, EDGAR (CIK 0000836136) and (CIK 0000014306) ; Government of Alberta, EDGAR (CIK 0000810961) ; Government of Saskatchewan, EDGAR (CIK 0000203098) ; Government of Manitoba, EDGAR (CIK 0000826926) ; Ontario, EDGAR (CIK 0000074615) ; Quebec, EDGAR (0000722803) ; Province of New Brunswick, EDGAR (CIK 0000862406) ; Province of Nova Scotia, EDGAR (CIK 0000842639) 2) Copy of the Clearfield Doctrine; showing that corporations by ANY name DO NOT have the legal jurisdiction to taxation or law enforcement et al, without a consent to contract which is corporate policy when doing commerce. * Seek legal clarification and written proof to the contrary. This letter comes with the enclosed documents to ascertain the jurisdiction within our council, in which official positions are being held . Depending on the Oath, Declaration, or Covenant signed upon entering office, the positions may be operating under the "Color of Law," in a De-Facto, Un-lawful and thus ultra vires standing. This holds personal liability for anything signed on behalf of the people. There are 3 possible jurisdictions: A) Government Office: a PUBLIC OFFICE institution with full legal authority and jurisdiction to taxation, schools, infrastructure, peace keeping, hospital, courts, et al. as services, and needs of the local men and women therein. B) Having as the "Trustee" full fiduciary control of the "Trusts" set up to care for the local needs. De-jure/ lawful B) Non-Governmental Office, (NGO): a PRIVATE CORPORATE OFFICE, without the legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. This entity provides "Service Contracts," which requires contracts and consent to contract by those involved in the services. It's known as "Body Corporate," and serves "Incorporated Inhabitants." Did the men and women give consent to be incorporated? That's called FRAUD. Who is the "Head of Council" or "Global Mayor?" (“A created fiction” The Executive Control and Authority comes from the Corporation of the Province wherein we reside, and to which your office would receive the Acts, Statutes, Bylaws et al directly, through downloads from the corporation and are corporate policies not district policies. De-facto/ un-lawful/FRAUD C) Public/Private/Partnerships, (PPP): an International Entity one which downloads "FOREIGN," Corporate policies, UN/United Nations, WEF/ World Economic Forum, WHO/ World Health Organization et al. In this position there is also no legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. Consent to contract is a legal requirement to contract with the men and women. Did the men and women consent to Foreign Corporate Policies and occupation in the community without knowledge or consent? Are the United Nations Sustainable Goals/SDG's, Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 policies being implemented? Who has fiduciary control over the local Trusts as their Trustee? Who is the "Head of Council," and "Council of the Whole." “A fiction” De-Facto, un-lawful/FRAUD These are jurisdictional questions that are important to ascertain because through the stroke of a pen, a man or woman is being put into extreme personal liability for the agreements and infrastructures signed on to. Furthermore, there are 3 levels of Lawful/de-jure/jurisdictions LOCAL, PROVINCIAL, and FEDERAL - Each has their sphere of lawful jurisdiction and geographical area - Each has independent legislative, fiduciary, and judicial powers - NO level can legislate for the other jurisdiction NOR has the authority to operate beyond its purview We the people have come to ascertain for ourselves the jurisdiction WE are in because the last few years have shown us that something has gone horribly awry at the local level. We the people voted for positions of service to the local jurisdiction. Was there comprehension of the meaning of the oath, declaration or covenant sworn, upon taking office? Was time given to properly peruse any documents to sign and vote on? Many of these documents were written over many years, by legal firms and lawyers, whose signatures are not within the documents...whose are! They contain legalise, a language unto itself, and is the basis for how most FRAUD has occurred. Words like person, individual, inhabitant, resident, citizen, et al have a completely different meaning in these documents. FRAUD vitiates everything. We the people intend on restoring Peace, Order, and Lawful Governance should our suspicions prove correct. We require a response by ________________________________ and expect such from our elected officials. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law, and thus consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls upon the claimant. No response is considered tacit agreement. ______________________________________________________ Regional District of Address Date TO: Board Chair, CAO, CEO, Directors et al FROM: The enclosed documentation: 1) Proof of the Incorporation of the following entities, NOTE: government services corporations (dba:"doing business as,") EDGAR Search U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; Government of Canada, (CIK 0000230098) Government of British Columbia, (CIK 0000836136) and (CIK 0000014306) Government of Alberta, (CIK 0000810961) Government of Saskatchewan, (CIK 0000203098) Government of Manitoba, (CIK 0000826926) Ontario, (CIK 0000074615) Quebec, (CIK 0000722803) Province of New Brunswick, (CIK 0000862406) Province of Nova Scotia, (CIK 0000842639) 2) Copy of The CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE; showing that Corporations by ANY name DO NOT have the legal jurisdiction to Taxation or Law Enforcement et al without consent to contract by those involved in the transaction. Personal liability is then enforceable upon those acting illegally. The enclosed documents show that the Regional District through its Incorporation may be operating under the "Color of Law" and as such is de-facto, un-lawful, and ultra-vires. This information is not hear-say nor opinion, rather they state the facts of the matter, which are; ?- What Oath, Declaration, or Covenant was signed upon the commencement of the positions in council? These matter! ?- What jurisdiction is the office under? There are 3 possible Jurisdictions; 1) Government Office: a PUBLIC OFFICE institution, with lawful de-jure status as a holder of the "PUBLIC TRUST", Trustee with Fiduciary control, and thus legal authority to the taxation of the men and women within a geographical area, and is one of "service" to the local needs; school, hospital, peace keeping, infrastructure, courts, et al. 2) Non-Governmental Office (NGO): a PRIVATE CORPORATE OFFICE, that provides "Service Contracts," and is known as a "Body Corporate" to "Incorporated Inhabitants." This jurisdiction requires Consent to Contract, is de-facto, un-lawful and as such has NO legal jurisdiction to taxation. The Executive Control and Authority comes from the corporation of the province wherein the office is located. The Acts, Statutes, Bylaws et al are downloaded to the district and are corporate policies. 3) Public/Private/Partnerships (PPP) : an INTERNATIONAL ENTITY, receiving downloads from a "FOREIGN" Corporation; United Nations, WHO/World Health Organization, WEF/World Economic Forum et al. This is also a de-facto, un-lawful jurisdiction with NO legal grounds to the taxation of men and women, and also requires Consent to Contract. NOTE: In British Columbia, as an example, The BC Assessment Authority is a CROWN Corporation, created in 1974 by the Corporation of British Columbia Inc., "in order to earn profit for the Government of British Columbia Inc., without jurisdiction nor contracts with the men and women of BC. NOTE: There are 3 levels of lawful, de-jure governance Local, Provincial and Federal - Each has their sphere of jurisdiction and geographical area - Each has independent legislative, fiduciary, and judicial powers - NO level can legislate for the other jurisdiction NOR has the authority to operate beyond its purview These 2 questions are the most important because the answer to them will establish the personal liability through the signature/autograph put upon the documents requiring a vote. Was there full comprehension of the Oath, Declaration, or Covenant signed when entering office as a Director? Was there time to peruse any documents requiring a vote? Most often these documents are many pages long and were made over many years, by legal firms and lawyers whose signatures are NOT contained therein. Whose is? Making that signature "personally" liable for the decisions made Was there full comprehension of the difference between the legal wording contained therein, and the knowledge of their meanings? Such as person, individual, constituent, citizen,et al. "Legalese" is a language unto itself and is the basis for most FRAUD, which in law vitiates everything. The men and women in our Regional District Office were empowered by the men and women, to operate under, and in a jurisdiction that is de-jure, lawful, and with a fiduciary trust, to serve the men and women of our geographical area and no other. To ensure that the needs of the local men, women, and their property were the priority and responsibility of the Regional District. So...What Office is held? Lawfully/de-jure or unlawfully and de-facto? We require an answer, on or before __________________ No answer will be considered a tacit agreement. The office of the Regional District is held by the trust of the members of our community, the neighbours and friends who voted for positions in an office to serve the community. That's why we require proof of what oath, declaration, or covenant was given. The men and women of __________________ _________________________________________________________ Notice of Demand and Trespass Proof of Jurisdiction and Contract Proof of Claim It has come to our attention, the concerned men and women, that our Educational Institutions, whose service to us is the education of our sons and daughters (hereafter named as our "property") has implemented the SOGI 123 Program without a consent to contract. HISTORY; this program began in 2007 through the ARC Foundation. A private foundation based in Vancouver, British Columbia Inc. Other corporations involved in the funding are; British Columbia Ministry of Education Inc.; British Columbia Teachers Federation Inc.; University of British Columbia Inc., and through private donations( gifts from registered charities also corporations), and the corporation of Canada Inc. Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Documents included herein: - Proof of the incorporation of Government of Canada Inc., Government of British Columbia Inc. - Copy of the "CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE", a 1942 court case, accepted worldwide because it's corporate, commerce law. Clearly stating the requirement of contracts Governments lose their sovereignty when they become corporations, thus no different than Canadian Tire using Canadian Tire money. - Copy of the definition of "GLOSSA", pertinent in this matter because it's a matter of concealment, meant to confuse using "text" to corrupt the real facts in order to gain tacit consent. There's no statute of limitation on fraud. - Our Mayoral, Councillor, and Regional Districts are also incorporated through the removal of many of the municipal powers in 2004 with the Local Government Act incorporated into the Community Charter, prior to this; the local mayor had full de-jure and lawful jurisdiction, in relation to our schools. - Copy of the definition of the All Capital Identity, created with the "Birth Certificate," a fiction, constructive fraud and conversion. - Copy of the 10 Points of Contract Law, made simple for comprehension on this matter. - Copy of the 12 Presumptions of Court. Included for the comprehension of status. Fundamentally, the fraud upon our property when born, vitiates any Board jurisdiction to the ownership of our property. We, the men and women who created them, own them. "He who creates owns!" A maxim in law Therefore, it is incumbent upon those who have positions on the Board to cease and desist the SOGI 123 Program which is an infringement upon the property known as our sons and daughters. Failure to do so as corporate entities, through Contract Law, we intend on exercising our jurisdiction, as is our right, to the fullest extent upon the men and women personally sitting on the Board. We strongly suggest a consultation with a lawyer, who by the way wrote this mess. "Praetextu legis injusta agens duplo puniendus" We the People DO NOT require legal Re-presentation in this matter because we're well aware of the 12 Presumptions of Court. I doubt any lawyer will be willing to assist the men and women on the Board, regardless of the facts, because through their: legalize they do deceive. Be it therefore noted, with the documents contained herein, that our claim of proof of contract and the jurisdictional fraud, put against us and our property is considered a trespass. It is the duty of men and women to discuss these delicate matters with our property within our own jurisdiction. We are not against the health and wellbeing of another's property, within their jurisdiction, rather not in the educational setting. We the People, regarding our property in the care of the educational system, again, reiterate, and declare that the burden of proof falls on the claimant. Consider the response with wisdom and discernment since we voted men and women into what we thought was a Educational Office not a Corporate Office. We require no more than 7 days for implementing the redressing of the trespass against our property, with the immediate removal of any and all literature, electronic or written, devices, toys (we use the word with baited breath) et al in relation to the SOGI 123 PROGRAM post haste. For it was through corporate policies, without contractual consent, that the trespass has been made against our property thus creating this claim against those men and women on the Board personally. Furthermore, do not be deceived into thinking that the registration of our property into the corporation rather than an educational institution voids any responsibility on the part of the men and women on the Board, as it was done in fraud. Again we'll state that fraud vitiates everything. In all fairness to the men and women on the Board, our neighbours, not the corporations involved, perhaps unaware of the situation mentioned above and the personal liability for this trespass, We the People will support the men and women in this matter of remedy, because we trusted that their service, while sitting on the Board, was to serve our property with a lawful education. No response will be considered a tacit agreement. Sincerely and without prejudice or malice We the People Autograph_______________________:________ __________________________________________________________ Statement of Claim Taxation Between the Corporation of ______________________________________ And the noted particulars on the documents included herein. The above corporation has not proved jurisdiction, consent to contract, nor provide proof of a contract to claim the monies expected in taxation, hence tacit agreement to this claim. Who claims this debt be true, who claims this debt to due? Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Three requirements were made in writing to the Corporations Finance Minister to provide said proof, and are included in this document. Furthermore, copies of the Clearfield Doctrine, EDGAR # for the Corporation involved, Regina-v-John Anthony Hill 12 May, 2011 at Southwark Crown Court, Case # T20107746, (the Queen declared, "Lawfully NOT valid Monarch, hence Charles the III too),and "Glossa," (see Black's Law) corrupts the essence of the text presented on your documents. This refusal of consent to contract extends from this day forward, as noted with receipt of this document, until such a date in the future when there is a de-jure government upon the landmass commonly known worldwide as Canada, British Columbia, et al. Autograph _________________________:___________________________ Dated this day _______________________________________________________ Proof of Claim Re: Property Tax; Contract and Proof of Consent to Contract Between the Corporation of ___________________________________________________ and _____________________________________________________________________________ Regarding the property registered as; ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ It is required and incumbent upon the Corporations Minister of Finance, to provide proof of jurisdiction as a corporation, to taxation without full disclosure of the facts, and consent to contract, as per contract law. See: The Clearfield Doctrine; Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. 363 Syllabus CLEARFIELD TRUST CO. et al. v. UNITED STATES CERTIORARI to the CIRCUIT COURT of APPEALS for the THIRD CIRCUIT No. 490 Argued February 5, 1943 Decided March 1, 1943(and accepted worldwide when conducting commerce) Further to the above noted court case, this requirement will be expected within 7 days receipt of this claim for proof of the jurisdictional obligation by the corporation to taxation to the property noted herein. Who claims this debt be true, who claims this debt be due? Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Property Taxes have been paid previously without consent to contract, due to the fraud perpetrated without full disclosure of the fact that the corporation mentioned herein, was not a lawful government with the de-jure jurisdiction to taxation, thus Ultra-Vires. Rather, a corporation whose name included the words "government," which is fraud based on Black's Law Dictionary, any edition. No response will be confirmation of a tacit agreement to the above. Thanking you in advance, Autograph: _________________________:_____________________________ Dated this day: ______________________________________ ______________________________________________________ STATEMENT of CLAIM Date:_____________________ STATE of TITLE CERTIFICATE: Certificate number________________________________________ Land Title Office__________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ Title Number______________________________________________ Registered Owner__________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Taxation Authority__________________________________________ Description of Land__________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Charges, Liens and Interests_____________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ Proof of contract is required to provide evidence of any claim made upon the aforementioned property; taxation; land use; water use; structures and buildings above, on, or below the land; any and all animals thereon; any and all chattles upon said land; et al, provide proof of any contractual obligation having been made with respect to said land. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law, and thus consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. (See: Regina-v-John Anthony Hill 12 May, 2011 at Southwark Crown Court, Case # T20107746, in which the Queen was declared to be a "Lawfully NOT Valid Monarch." Hence, neither is Charles the III) (See: Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. 363, Syllabus. Clearfield trust Co.et al. v. United States, Certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.No. 490. Argued February 5, 1943 Decided March 1, 1943 ; and accepted worldwide when conducting commerce) The requirement to provide Proof of Contract within this Statement of Claim, is expected within ____________days from receipt of the documentation herein. No response will be considered a tacit agreement to the above. Autograph_________________________:_______________________ :GLOSSA: ~ The 'Born-Date' Vs. the 'Registration-Date' Does your Birth Certificate identify YOU as TWO people, not one? (You is plural, one and another) Have you ever wondered why your SURNAME is written using the ALL UPPERCASE TEXT? Put simply, 'you' are using a ‘Legal’ name and this is fraud. See the ‘name’ is actually split up into separate entities – The Christian-name and The ‘Surname’. You register these names to the Crown Corporation LTD. as their Property by your Birth Certificate which is given a bond number. Your physical value is used as collateral for these bonds allowing the United Kingdom LTD. to take out loans from private Banks, such as 'Bank of England' and profit is made by way of legal fines (Acts & Statutes), bills and taxation. – Hence money is no longer backed by Gold or Silver, but by our physical value or man power. The UNITED KINGDOM LTD is a privately owned Corporation-ship. And corporations are considered ‘ships’ and they are governed under the law of the sea, known as Maritime Law. There is no real 'ship' but a 'document-vessel' – which in our case was our Birth Certificate Created by the Doctor when s/he ‘docked’ you. TAKE NOTICE Whenever you encounter the Legal Document (document-vessel) you will notice that your surname (or sometimes all of your names) will be written using the ALL-UPPERCASE TEXT. This is no coincidence - the ALL UPPERCASE text is not defined or recognized in The Oxford Styles Manual, (the governing book of the English language) – meaning that although you may be able to read it as English, it is in fact, NOT English. The all CAPS or Gloss can be found within the 'Oxford Styles Manual', under 'foreign-languages', named 'Ancient-Latin' The main place this ALL-UPPERCASE text is found to be defined as a language, is when American Sign Language (ASL), a signing language used for the deaf, is written. ASL can be defined in the book ‘The Chicago Manual of Style’ under the foreign-languages header: American Sign Language (ASL) compound signs, 10.152 and ‘glosses, 10.147’. Thus, defining this text as a foreign language Further going on to say that when written, it has no 1-to-1 correspondence with any other languages on the document. The all CAPS or Gloss is also found in the 'Oxford Styles Manual', under foreign-languages, 'Ancient-Latin', however as the all caps UK LTD is registered in [Washington D.C[, they seem to be using the 'Chicago Manual of Style' , not the Oxford. Putting two or more languages onto a legal document is known in law as a ‘Glossa’. Black's Law Dictionary defines: 'GLOSSA' - “It is a poisonous gloss which corrupts the essence of the text”. Meaning that by using a Glossa in a document they are trying to conceal or confuse the real facts. If you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL-UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL if you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALLf you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So, you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL-UPPER CASE. If you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL-UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So, you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL Soon you will realize that virtually all court orders, speeding tickets and most other legal documents actually make no sense whatsoever. They only make sense when we make the assumption that it is all plain English and we read it as one, once you take one away from the other – it renders the document useless. Seeing as the ‘government’ is simply a privately owned Corporation, it can only impose fines and acts upon other corporations. And by tricking us to registering our names as a corporate entity and then tricking us into thinking these names are physically us, it manages to get us to represent the corporately registered name and therefore bear the burden of fines and policies. This is a crime known as “personage”. Hand in hand with “personage” comes a crime known as “barratry” which is knowingly bringing false claims into court- This is what police, politicians, judges are doing daily. The Birth-Certificate, Two-Names, Two-Dates and Two-Languages? Capitis Diminutio Maxima (Name in ALL CAPITALS) For the purposes of understanding one's legal or commercial status under the Admiralty system (the law system used in England, Canada and much of the US), it is necessary to examine the curious use of all CAPS -Capitis Diminutio Maxima- in legal and domestic income tax forms, credit cards & statements, loans, mortgages, speeding & parking tickets, car documents, road tax, court summons etc. While seemingly a trite concern, this apparently small detail has extremely deep significance for all of us! Gage Canadian Dictionary 1983 Sec. 4 defines Capitalize adj. as "To take advantage of - To use to one's own advantage." Black's Law Dictionary – Revised 4th Edition 1968, provides a more comprehensive definition as follows … Capitis Diminutio (meaning the diminishing of status through the use of capitalization)- In Roman law. A diminishing or abridgment of personality; a loss or curtailment of a man's status or aggregate of leg al attributes and qualifications.

This is who You would vote for to Save Canada. Don't you see what he is doing here. He is fully endorsing UNDRIP and the Indian, Inuit, Mete, takeover of the land you paid for. He is spear heading an Indian tax on corporations now, but you will be next. He is NOT telling you that All of Canada is being claimed as THEIR Land. This is not just Reserves, as he is CONning you with. Pierre is a UN Globalist of the Highest Order. CPC - Communist Party of Canada because they signed onto the UN Agenda 21 / 2030 takeover plans. Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 https://rumble.com/v4govwc-facts-vs-fiction-know-who-owns-the-land-not-canada-or-their-corrup-peice-of.html A beneficiary is a person (or entity) who is designated to receive the benefits of property owned by someone else. https://www.ontario.ca/page/get-or-replace-ontario-birth-certificate CIPO online \https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/canadian-intellectual-property-office/en Alberta Live Birth Cerificate https://formsmgmt.gov.ab.ca/Public/DVS11163B.xdp BC Live Birth Order certificates and copies https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/life-events/order-certificates-copies Canadian Intellectual Property Office https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/canadian-intellectual-property-office/en B PROOF OF CLAIM A beneficiary is a person (or entity) who is designated to receive the benefits of property owned by someone else. Rights Doc. 4 WE are all born with free will and unalienable rights. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law’ Consent makes the contract Adhesion contracts are not contracts because there was no consent, they are considered as gifts. We do not require any corporate created rights, such as the Charter of Rights and Freedom provided by the Government of Canada Corporation and/or ICCPR provided by the United Nations Corporation. If anyone claims to have jurisdiction over, you and/or requests payment request a copy of the contract. Government Corporations Government Services Corporations doing business as Government of Canada and/or the government of any provinces can only create rules (statutes) that only apply to their employees, franchisees, officers and dependents. Their rules (statutes) do not apply to the people in general. That is why the rules they create (statutes) are referred to as “public policy”. We do not require any corporate created rights, such as the Charter of Rights and Freedom provided by the Government of Canada Corporation and/or ICCPR provided by the United Nations Corporation. Women and men living in Canada are not subject to any Public Policies, mandates, or acts of legislation promoted by any commercial or municipal corporation for its officers and employees. We should not vote in private corporate shareholder elections sponsored by Canada Inc., Province of _____ Inc., or any other foreign corporation. All Acts, Bills and statutes created by the Government of Canada and/or any of the provincial governments only apply to “person”. The definition of person in Black’s Law Dictionary Fifth Edition on page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being ( i.e. natural person ) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words, if I say the basket includes apples and oranges you will not find any other type of fruit in the basket. As plainly stated in Black’s Law dictionary, anything that applies to person only applies to a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Does not apply to men or women! The Government of Canada and Government of all provinces are Crown for profit Corporations. The Prime Minister and/or the Premiers receive their orders from the shareholders of the Crown Corporation. They are the C.E.O.s/officers of the Crown Corporations. They carry out the orders that are relayed to them by the Governor General and/or the Lieutenant Governor. They (politicians) are in place to take the blame for the harm that is done to the people. They are replaced every four years with someone who claims that he/she is going to right the wrongs that were created, but nothing changes they carry out the orders provided by the shareholders as the previous C.E.O.s. Four years later they are blamed and replaced. PERSONS All Acts, Bills and statutes created by the Government of Canada and/or any of the provincial governments only apply to “person”. The definition of person in Black’s Law Dictionary Fifth Edition on page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being (i.e. natural person ) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words, if I say the basket includes apples and oranges you will not find any other type of fruit in the basket. As plainly stated in Black’s Law dictionary, anything that applies to person only applies to a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Does not apply to men or women _________________________________________________________ Name written in all capital letters The governing book of the English language is “The Oxford Styles Manual” which sometimes refers to “The Chicago Manual of Style” also The Oxford Manual of Style. All Uppercase text, all caps, or gloss is listed in the style's manuals under “foreign - language” , named ”Ancient-Latin” or Dog Latin. All Caps are not defined or recognized in meaning. All Caps is not English although you may think you are able to read it as English it is in fact, a calculated deception to be read separated from the rest of the “Document”. All Uppercase text has no lawful grammatical jurisdiction with common English and is a foreign language, headed under “Ancient-Latin”. (The Chicago Manual of Style, 16th Edition, 11:144-47). Glossa is two or more languages on a legal document. Glossa is a poisonous gloss which corrupts the essence of a text( Black’s Law Dictionary page 621 5th Edition) “Glossa” is also used to conceal or confuse the real facts in order to confuse, in order to gain tacit consent. A name written in all capital letters is written in dog Latin or is known as systemic text “a thing” created by the employees of the crown corporation, Therefore the Crown Corporation owns the creation. If you claim that the name written in all capital letters, is, you. You are admitting you are the property of the Crown Corporation (a slave). Cestui Que Vie Trust 's beneficiary is the name in all capital letters which is the property of the Crown Corporation, it is not you. All governments (corporations) and businesses such as banks and others that write your name in all capital letters are committing constructive fraud and conversion. (Engaged in criminal activity) ___________________________________________________ City, Municipality, Village et al Address Date TO: Mayor, CAO, CEO, Councillors et al FROM: The men and women living therein, The enclosed documentation: 1) Proof of Incorporation of the following entities; from Dunn & Bradstreet or EDGAR Search U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Note: the following are government services corporations’ (dba( "doing business as,") Government of Canada, EDGAR (CIK 0000230098) ; Government of British Columbia, EDGAR (CIK 0000836136) and (CIK 0000014306) ; Government of Alberta, EDGAR (CIK 0000810961) ; Government of Saskatchewan, EDGAR (CIK 0000203098) ; Government of Manitoba, EDGAR (CIK 0000826926) ; Ontario, EDGAR (CIK 0000074615) ; Quebec, EDGAR (0000722803) ; Province of New Brunswick, EDGAR (CIK 0000862406) ; Province of Nova Scotia, EDGAR (CIK 0000842639) 2) Copy of the Clearfield Doctrine; showing that corporations by ANY name DO NOT have the legal jurisdiction to taxation or law enforcement et al, without a consent to contract which is corporate policy when doing commerce. * Seek legal clarification and written proof to the contrary. This letter comes with the enclosed documents to ascertain the jurisdiction within our council, in which official positions are being held . Depending on the Oath, Declaration, or Covenant signed upon entering office, the positions may be operating under the "Color of Law," in a De-Facto, Un-lawful and thus ultra vires standing. This holds personal liability for anything signed on behalf of the people. There are 3 possible jurisdictions: A) Government Office: a PUBLIC OFFICE institution with full legal authority and jurisdiction to taxation, schools, infrastructure, peace keeping, hospital, courts, et al. as services, and needs of the local men and women therein. B) Having as the "Trustee" full fiduciary control of the "Trusts" set up to care for the local needs. De-jure/ lawful B) Non-Governmental Office, (NGO): a PRIVATE CORPORATE OFFICE, without the legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. This entity provides "Service Contracts," which requires contracts and consent to contract by those involved in the services. It's known as "Body Corporate," and serves "Incorporated Inhabitants." Did the men and women give consent to be incorporated? That's called FRAUD. Who is the "Head of Council" or "Global Mayor?" (“A created fiction” The Executive Control and Authority comes from the Corporation of the Province wherein we reside, and to which your office would receive the Acts, Statutes, Bylaws et al directly, through downloads from the corporation and are corporate policies not district policies. De-facto/ un-lawful/FRAUD C) Public/Private/Partnerships, (PPP): an International Entity one which downloads "FOREIGN," Corporate policies, UN/United Nations, WEF/ World Economic Forum, WHO/ World Health Organization et al. In this position there is also no legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. Consent to contract is a legal requirement to contract with the men and women. Did the men and women consent to Foreign Corporate Policies and occupation in the community without knowledge or consent? Are the United Nations Sustainable Goals/SDG's, Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 policies being implemented? Who has fiduciary control over the local Trusts as their Trustee? Who is the "Head of Council," and "Council of the Whole." “A fiction” De-Facto, un-lawful/FRAUD These are jurisdictional questions that are important to ascertain because through the stroke of a pen, a man or woman is being put into extreme personal liability for the agreements and infrastructures signed on to. Furthermore, there are 3 levels of Lawful/de-jure/jurisdictions LOCAL, PROVINCIAL, and FEDERAL - Each has their sphere of lawful jurisdiction and geographical area - Each has independent legislative, fiduciary, and judicial powers - NO level can legislate for the other jurisdiction NOR has the authority to operate beyond its purview We the people have come to ascertain for ourselves the jurisdiction WE are in because the last few years have shown us that something has gone horribly awry at the local level. We the people voted for positions of service to the local jurisdiction. Was there comprehension of the meaning of the oath, declaration or covenant sworn, upon taking office? Was time given to properly peruse any documents to sign and vote on? Many of these documents were written over many years, by legal firms and lawyers, whose signatures are not within the documents...whose are! They contain legalise, a language unto itself, and is the basis for how most FRAUD has occurred. Words like person, individual, inhabitant, resident, citizen, et al have a completely different meaning in these documents. FRAUD vitiates everything. We the people intend on restoring Peace, Order, and Lawful Governance should our suspicions prove correct. We require a response by ________________________________ and expect such from our elected officials. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law, and thus consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls upon the claimant. No response is considered tacit agreement. ______________________________________________________ Regional District of Address Date TO: Board Chair, CAO, CEO, Directors et al FROM: The enclosed documentation: 1) Proof of the Incorporation of the following entities, NOTE: government services corporations (dba:"doing business as,") EDGAR Search U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; Government of Canada, (CIK 0000230098) Government of British Columbia, (CIK 0000836136) and (CIK 0000014306) Government of Alberta, (CIK 0000810961) Government of Saskatchewan, (CIK 0000203098) Government of Manitoba, (CIK 0000826926) Ontario, (CIK 0000074615) Quebec, (CIK 0000722803) Province of New Brunswick, (CIK 0000862406) Province of Nova Scotia, (CIK 0000842639) 2) Copy of The CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE; showing that Corporations by ANY name DO NOT have the legal jurisdiction to Taxation or Law Enforcement et al without consent to contract by those involved in the transaction. Personal liability is then enforceable upon those acting illegally. The enclosed documents show that the Regional District through its Incorporation may be operating under the "Color of Law" and as such is de-facto, un-lawful, and ultra-vires. This information is not hear-say nor opinion, rather they state the facts of the matter, which are; ?- What Oath, Declaration, or Covenant was signed upon the commencement of the positions in council? These matter! ?- What jurisdiction is the office under? There are 3 possible Jurisdictions; 1) Government Office: a PUBLIC OFFICE institution, with lawful de-jure status as a holder of the "PUBLIC TRUST", Trustee with Fiduciary control, and thus legal authority to the taxation of the men and women within a geographical area, and is one of "service" to the local needs; school, hospital, peace keeping, infrastructure, courts, et al. 2) Non-Governmental Office (NGO): a PRIVATE CORPORATE OFFICE, that provides "Service Contracts," and is known as a "Body Corporate" to "Incorporated Inhabitants." This jurisdiction requires Consent to Contract, is de-facto, un-lawful and as such has NO legal jurisdiction to taxation. The Executive Control and Authority comes from the corporation of the province wherein the office is located. The Acts, Statutes, Bylaws et al are downloaded to the district and are corporate policies. 3) Public/Private/Partnerships (PPP) : an INTERNATIONAL ENTITY, receiving downloads from a "FOREIGN" Corporation; United Nations, WHO/World Health Organization, WEF/World Economic Forum et al. This is also a de-facto, un-lawful jurisdiction with NO legal grounds to the taxation of men and women, and also requires Consent to Contract. NOTE: In British Columbia, as an example, The BC Assessment Authority is a CROWN Corporation, created in 1974 by the Corporation of British Columbia Inc., "in order to earn profit for the Government of British Columbia Inc., without jurisdiction nor contracts with the men and women of BC. NOTE: There are 3 levels of lawful, de-jure governance Local, Provincial and Federal - Each has their sphere of jurisdiction and geographical area - Each has independent legislative, fiduciary, and judicial powers - NO level can legislate for the other jurisdiction NOR has the authority to operate beyond its purview These 2 questions are the most important because the answer to them will establish the personal liability through the signature/autograph put upon the documents requiring a vote. Was there full comprehension of the Oath, Declaration, or Covenant signed when entering office as a Director? Was there time to peruse any documents requiring a vote? Most often these documents are many pages long and were made over many years, by legal firms and lawyers whose signatures are NOT contained therein. Whose is? Making that signature "personally" liable for the decisions made Was there full comprehension of the difference between the legal wording contained therein, and the knowledge of their meanings? Such as person, individual, constituent, citizen,et al. "Legalese" is a language unto itself and is the basis for most FRAUD, which in law vitiates everything. The men and women in our Regional District Office were empowered by the men and women, to operate under, and in a jurisdiction that is de-jure, lawful, and with a fiduciary trust, to serve the men and women of our geographical area and no other. To ensure that the needs of the local men, women, and their property were the priority and responsibility of the Regional District. So...What Office is held? Lawfully/de-jure or unlawfully and de-facto? We require an answer, on or before __________________ No answer will be considered a tacit agreement. The office of the Regional District is held by the trust of the members of our community, the neighbours and friends who voted for positions in an office to serve the community. That's why we require proof of what oath, declaration, or covenant was given. The men and women of __________________ _________________________________________________________ Notice of Demand and Trespass Proof of Jurisdiction and Contract Proof of Claim It has come to our attention, the concerned men and women, that our Educational Institutions, whose service to us is the education of our sons and daughters (hereafter named as our "property") has implemented the SOGI 123 Program without a consent to contract. HISTORY; this program began in 2007 through the ARC Foundation. A private foundation based in Vancouver, British Columbia Inc. Other corporations involved in the funding are; British Columbia Ministry of Education Inc.; British Columbia Teachers Federation Inc.; University of British Columbia Inc., and through private donations( gifts from registered charities also corporations), and the corporation of Canada Inc. Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Documents included herein: - Proof of the incorporation of Government of Canada Inc., Government of British Columbia Inc. - Copy of the "CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE", a 1942 court case, accepted worldwide because it's corporate, commerce law. Clearly stating the requirement of contracts Governments lose their sovereignty when they become corporations, thus no different than Canadian Tire using Canadian Tire money. - Copy of the definition of "GLOSSA", pertinent in this matter because it's a matter of concealment, meant to confuse using "text" to corrupt the real facts in order to gain tacit consent. There's no statute of limitation on fraud. - Our Mayoral, Councillor, and Regional Districts are also incorporated through the removal of many of the municipal powers in 2004 with the Local Government Act incorporated into the Community Charter, prior to this; the local mayor had full de-jure and lawful jurisdiction, in relation to our schools. - Copy of the definition of the All Capital Identity, created with the "Birth Certificate," a fiction, constructive fraud and conversion. - Copy of the 10 Points of Contract Law, made simple for comprehension on this matter. - Copy of the 12 Presumptions of Court. Included for the comprehension of status. Fundamentally, the fraud upon our property when born, vitiates any Board jurisdiction to the ownership of our property. We, the men and women who created them, own them. "He who creates owns!" A maxim in law Therefore, it is incumbent upon those who have positions on the Board to cease and desist the SOGI 123 Program which is an infringement upon the property known as our sons and daughters. Failure to do so as corporate entities, through Contract Law, we intend on exercising our jurisdiction, as is our right, to the fullest extent upon the men and women personally sitting on the Board. We strongly suggest a consultation with a lawyer, who by the way wrote this mess. "Praetextu legis injusta agens duplo puniendus" We the People DO NOT require legal Re-presentation in this matter because we're well aware of the 12 Presumptions of Court. I doubt any lawyer will be willing to assist the men and women on the Board, regardless of the facts, because through their: legalize they do deceive. Be it therefore noted, with the documents contained herein, that our claim of proof of contract and the jurisdictional fraud, put against us and our property is considered a trespass. It is the duty of men and women to discuss these delicate matters with our property within our own jurisdiction. We are not against the health and wellbeing of another's property, within their jurisdiction, rather not in the educational setting. We the People, regarding our property in the care of the educational system, again, reiterate, and declare that the burden of proof falls on the claimant. Consider the response with wisdom and discernment since we voted men and women into what we thought was a Educational Office not a Corporate Office. We require no more than 7 days for implementing the redressing of the trespass against our property, with the immediate removal of any and all literature, electronic or written, devices, toys (we use the word with baited breath) et al in relation to the SOGI 123 PROGRAM post haste. For it was through corporate policies, without contractual consent, that the trespass has been made against our property thus creating this claim against those men and women on the Board personally. Furthermore, do not be deceived into thinking that the registration of our property into the corporation rather than an educational institution voids any responsibility on the part of the men and women on the Board, as it was done in fraud. Again we'll state that fraud vitiates everything. In all fairness to the men and women on the Board, our neighbours, not the corporations involved, perhaps unaware of the situation mentioned above and the personal liability for this trespass, We the People will support the men and women in this matter of remedy, because we trusted that their service, while sitting on the Board, was to serve our property with a lawful education. No response will be considered a tacit agreement. Sincerely and without prejudice or malice We the People Autograph_______________________:________ __________________________________________________________ Statement of Claim Taxation Between the Corporation of ______________________________________ And the noted particulars on the documents included herein. The above corporation has not proved jurisdiction, consent to contract, nor provide proof of a contract to claim the monies expected in taxation, hence tacit agreement to this claim. Who claims this debt be true, who claims this debt to due? Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Three requirements were made in writing to the Corporations Finance Minister to provide said proof, and are included in this document. Furthermore, copies of the Clearfield Doctrine, EDGAR # for the Corporation involved, Regina-v-John Anthony Hill 12 May, 2011 at Southwark Crown Court, Case # T20107746, (the Queen declared, "Lawfully NOT valid Monarch, hence Charles the III too),and "Glossa," (see Black's Law) corrupts the essence of the text presented on your documents. This refusal of consent to contract extends from this day forward, as noted with receipt of this document, until such a date in the future when there is a de-jure government upon the landmass commonly known worldwide as Canada, British Columbia, et al. Autograph _________________________:___________________________ Dated this day _______________________________________________________ Proof of Claim Re: Property Tax; Contract and Proof of Consent to Contract Between the Corporation of ___________________________________________________ and _____________________________________________________________________________ Regarding the property registered as; ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ It is required and incumbent upon the Corporations Minister of Finance, to provide proof of jurisdiction as a corporation, to taxation without full disclosure of the facts, and consent to contract, as per contract law. See: The Clearfield Doctrine; Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. 363 Syllabus CLEARFIELD TRUST CO. et al. v. UNITED STATES CERTIORARI to the CIRCUIT COURT of APPEALS for the THIRD CIRCUIT No. 490 Argued February 5, 1943 Decided March 1, 1943(and accepted worldwide when conducting commerce) Further to the above noted court case, this requirement will be expected within 7 days receipt of this claim for proof of the jurisdictional obligation by the corporation to taxation to the property noted herein. Who claims this debt be true, who claims this debt be due? Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Property Taxes have been paid previously without consent to contract, due to the fraud perpetrated without full disclosure of the fact that the corporation mentioned herein, was not a lawful government with the de-jure jurisdiction to taxation, thus Ultra-Vires. Rather, a corporation whose name included the words "government," which is fraud based on Black's Law Dictionary, any edition. No response will be confirmation of a tacit agreement to the above. Thanking you in advance, Autograph: _________________________:_____________________________ Dated this day: ______________________________________ ______________________________________________________ STATEMENT of CLAIM Date:_____________________ STATE of TITLE CERTIFICATE: Certificate number________________________________________ Land Title Office__________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ Title Number______________________________________________ Registered Owner__________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Taxation Authority__________________________________________ Description of Land__________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Charges, Liens and Interests_____________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ Proof of contract is required to provide evidence of any claim made upon the aforementioned property; taxation; land use; water use; structures and buildings above, on, or below the land; any and all animals thereon; any and all chattles upon said land; et al, provide proof of any contractual obligation having been made with respect to said land. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law, and thus consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. (See: Regina-v-John Anthony Hill 12 May, 2011 at Southwark Crown Court, Case # T20107746, in which the Queen was declared to be a "Lawfully NOT Valid Monarch." Hence, neither is Charles the III) (See: Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. 363, Syllabus. Clearfield trust Co.et al. v. United States, Certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.No. 490. Argued February 5, 1943 Decided March 1, 1943 ; and accepted worldwide when conducting commerce) The requirement to provide Proof of Contract within this Statement of Claim, is expected within ____________days from receipt of the documentation herein. No response will be considered a tacit agreement to the above. Autograph_________________________:_______________________ :GLOSSA: ~ The 'Born-Date' Vs. the 'Registration-Date' Does your Birth Certificate identify YOU as TWO people, not one? (You is plural, one and another) Have you ever wondered why your SURNAME is written using the ALL UPPERCASE TEXT? Put simply, 'you' are using a ‘Legal’ name and this is fraud. See the ‘name’ is actually split up into separate entities – The Christian-name and The ‘Surname’. You register these names to the Crown Corporation LTD. as their Property by your Birth Certificate which is given a bond number. Your physical value is used as collateral for these bonds allowing the United Kingdom LTD. to take out loans from private Banks, such as 'Bank of England' and profit is made by way of legal fines (Acts & Statutes), bills and taxation. – Hence money is no longer backed by Gold or Silver, but by our physical value or man power. The UNITED KINGDOM LTD is a privately owned Corporation-ship. And corporations are considered ‘ships’ and they are governed under the law of the sea, known as Maritime Law. There is no real 'ship' but a 'document-vessel' – which in our case was our Birth Certificate Created by the Doctor when s/he ‘docked’ you. TAKE NOTICE Whenever you encounter the Legal Document (document-vessel) you will notice that your surname (or sometimes all of your names) will be written using the ALL-UPPERCASE TEXT. This is no coincidence - the ALL UPPERCASE text is not defined or recognized in The Oxford Styles Manual, (the governing book of the English language) – meaning that although you may be able to read it as English, it is in fact, NOT English. The all CAPS or Gloss can be found within the 'Oxford Styles Manual', under 'foreign-languages', named 'Ancient-Latin' The main place this ALL-UPPERCASE text is found to be defined as a language, is when American Sign Language (ASL), a signing language used for the deaf, is written. ASL can be defined in the book ‘The Chicago Manual of Style’ under the foreign-languages header: American Sign Language (ASL) compound signs, 10.152 and ‘glosses, 10.147’. Thus, defining this text as a foreign language Further going on to say that when written, it has no 1-to-1 correspondence with any other languages on the document. The all CAPS or Gloss is also found in the 'Oxford Styles Manual', under foreign-languages, 'Ancient-Latin', however as the all caps UK LTD is registered in [Washington D.C[, they seem to be using the 'Chicago Manual of Style' , not the Oxford. Putting two or more languages onto a legal document is known in law as a ‘Glossa’. Black's Law Dictionary defines: 'GLOSSA' - “It is a poisonous gloss which corrupts the essence of the text”. Meaning that by using a Glossa in a document they are trying to conceal or confuse the real facts. If you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL-UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL if you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALLf you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So, you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL-UPPER CASE. If you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL-UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So, you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL Soon you will realize that virtually all court orders, speeding tickets and most other legal documents actually make no sense whatsoever. They only make sense when we make the assumption that it is all plain English and we read it as one, once you take one away from the other – it renders the document useless. Seeing as the ‘government’ is simply a privately owned Corporation, it can only impose fines and acts upon other corporations. And by tricking us to registering our names as a corporate entity and then tricking us into thinking these names are physically us, it manages to get us to represent the corporately registered name and therefore bear the burden of fines and policies. This is a crime known as “personage”. Hand in hand with “personage” comes a crime known as “barratry” which is knowingly bringing false claims into court- This is what police, politicians, judges are doing daily. The Birth-Certificate, Two-Names, Two-Dates and Two-Languages? Capitis Diminutio Maxima (Name in ALL CAPITALS) For the purposes of understanding one's legal or commercial status under the Admiralty system (the law system used in England, Canada and much of the US), it is necessary to examine the curious use of all CAPS -Capitis Diminutio Maxima- in legal and domestic income tax forms, credit cards & statements, loans, mortgages, speeding & parking tickets, car documents, road tax, court summons etc. While seemingly a trite concern, this apparently small detail has extremely deep significance for all of us! Gage Canadian Dictionary 1983 Sec. 4 defines Capitalize adj. as "To take advantage of - To use to one's own advantage." Black's Law Dictionary – Revised 4th Edition 1968, provides a more comprehensive definition as follows … Capitis Diminutio (meaning the diminishing of status through the use of capitalization)- In Roman law. A diminishing or abridgment of personality; a loss or curtailment of a man's status or aggregate of leg al attributes and qualifications.

Subscribe thank You https://www.youtube.com/@constitutionalconventions6240 Freedom of information uncovers the fact that the Police are a business run for theft.

Subscribe thank You https://www.youtube.com/@constitutionalconventions6240 Canadians Need to be Educated About Canada’s history Constitutional Conventions Canadians need to be educated about Canada’s history – this is absolutely key if the people of the Canadian provinces have any chance of taking control of their lives and what belongs to them. Use the FLYER to help educate yourselves and others to the Solution. http://ConstitutionalConventions.ca “Constitutional Conventions web site has all the information” To understand where we are, we must first understand how we got here… Deep research has unearthed key events, which have both created and hidden the truth of what Canada is, and how you are governed. (Under a Dictatorship unaccountable to We The People) Event: From the 1700s into the next century, England and France were tense partners representing both Upper and Lower Canada. General Wolfe’s death in the final battle on the Plains of Abraham in 1759, secured victory for England, the prize ultimately known as, ‘Canada INC ’. The Treaty of Paris joined the formerly British controlled Upper Canada with France’s Lower Canada into the French legal entity – a Corporation Sole, the ‘Province of Quebec’. The amalgamation process from 1759 through 1763 seated the first British Governor General within that Corporation Sole, which in 1787 amalgamated all of ‘Canada’ enabling Britain to seat a Governor General to rule over their Colonies known then as: the ‘Province of Canada’ and New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. For 80 years between 1787 and 1867, the British placed many Governors General into the Corporation Sole. Issuing Letters Patent, the British Monarchy thereby proclaimed that Governor Generals held the ‘power’ to create and control the government of Canada, as a British Colony. Event: Delegates from Canada had no part in drafting the British North America Act, March 29, 1867, and no certified copy of this act was brought back to Canada by the delegates. The Act was drafted by Lord Thring, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury. It is not a Constitution for it constitutes nothing. It simply emphasizes the power of the Governor-General to appoint and remove a Privy Council to ‘aid and advise’ him and to state that the Governor-General has the power to pass an ‘order-in-council’ by himself individually as the case requires. ( An ‘order-in-council’ is equal to an Act of Parliament.) One score and two years later the Interpretations Act, 1889, was passed, stating that Canada is a Colony. This gives the lie to the story of Confederation and brands it as a reductio ad absurdum. ( disproof of a proposition by showing an absurdity to which it leads when carried to its logical conclusion (the carrying of something to an absurd extreme) Another recent absurdity is that a House and Senate of British Subjects debating the adoption of a Flag and Anthem. You say you have never heard of this before! You are not alone in this. The ‘Dominion of Canada’ meant the British Empire would retain their prize, the Governor General was then able to control all of Canada. John A. MacDonald, knighted as Sir John A., was ultimately a traitor to the people he represented in Canada. Joining the British mainland colonies, they created the Dominion – Canada East, now Quebec; Canada West, now Ontario; along with New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. Event: The year, 1868. Through their Royal Charter established in 1670 by King Charles 2nd, the privately held Hudson’s Bay Company employed land usage west of Quebec and Ontario, then known as Rupert’s Land. In 1868, British Parliament created the ‘Rupert’s Land Act’ to allow the Hudson’s Bay Company to sell use-of-land back to the Monarch, Queen Victoria. The following year, Hudson’s Bay Company finalized the transaction by signing the “Deed of Surrender”. In 1871 Queen Victoria transferred the use of those lands to the ‘Dominion of Canada’, operated by the Governor General to settle the land and create the western provinces, the allodial title would be held by the Court in Chancery for the British Empire until 1931. Event: The year, 1901. With Queen Victoria’s death, the repeal of Section 2 of the BNA Act came into force, deliberately leaving the Dominion of Canada without a Monarch. To this day the BNA Act repeal of Section 2 has never been re-enacted and the only Monarch it applies to is Queen Victoria. Event: The year, 1931. British Parliament passed the ‘Statute of Westminster’ allowing their Dominions to act independently. This would allow the said Dominions to federate and create their own Constitutions. Ireland, New Zealand, South Africa did – Canada did not. Why didn’t Canada federate? What does it really mean for us as “Canadians” today? Follow the money… to learn how certain forces active even today, were determined not to surrender their cherished positions of power. Continuing by way of deception, these forces kept alive the illusion of ‘Canadian Confederation’ and ‘Sovereignty’. This deliberate illusion continued throughout various iterations of the BNA Act, later called the “Constitution Acts” of 1940, 43, 49, 60, 65, 74, 75 and finally, 1982. Event: The year, 1946. King George VI appointed a Governor General to Canada. In 1947, he commanded the Parliament of Canada to create a commission to write Letters Patent for his Governor General, he then commanded Prime Minister Mackenzie King to sign the new “Letters Patent” on his behalf. The letters patent references the BNA act, 1867 “Letters Patent” enabling the Governor General to give Royal assent to the Income Tax act 1948. The Governor General sits in Ottawa and his Lieutenant Governors sit in each of the provinces – to report not to you the people, but to the “Queen in Right of Canada”. Today some statutes created by the various provincial governments or the Federal government receive Royal Accent, the positions of Lt. Governor ., GG and Queen of Canada are simply fictional figureheads with NO standing in law. Event: 1952 the Royal Styles and Titles act is created by the Parliament of Canada for the Queen of Canada, yes that’s correct the Queen of Canada proclaims through this act, to be the Queen of Canada, not joking. This should clear up any wonder over why at the inauguration ceremony of 2019, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and all elected members swore allegiance – hand-upon-Bible – to the Queen of Canada and not to the People of Canada. You may now have realized why. But wait, how does this work… according to the Statutes Law Revisions Act of 1893, Section 2 of the BNA act, 1867 was repealed, so what Queen? It’s time to discover the far-reaching impact against all of us! Event: The year, 1982. To prevent people from discovering the illusion, Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau and his Cabinet created the ‘Canada Bill’, delivering directly to the self-styled ‘Queen of Canada’, Britain’s Queen Elizabeth, for her delivery of it to the British Parliament to thereby pass it as the “Canada Act”, 1982. Trudeau would “patriate” the defunct BNA act 1867, to Canada – a photocopy, the original still residing in the UK Parliamentary Archives. Upon returning, Trudeau convinced all provinces to ratify the deception of the new ‘Constitution’. This was of the utmost of importance, without the provinces ratifying this Act of a foreign parliament it could not become Supreme Law (Law of the Sea) here on the landmass commonly known as Canada. All the provinces with the exception of Quebec signed off. Their problem, the Constitution Act was NOT ratified and has NO standing here on the landmass commonly known as Canada. The outcome of this adventure saw Trudeau retiring from politics, leaving his mess behind to be sorted out by future politicians. To ensure the deception was laid to rest, the “Government of Canada” knew they needed to amend ‘The Constitution Act, 1982’. There was the Meech Lake Accord of 1987, followed five years later by the Charlottetown Accord. These accords failed and the “Government of Canada” did not get what it wanted. As both Accords failed, the federal authority in 1995 let sleeping dogs lie, pretending everything was as it should be. After all, the people of Canada had yet to figure it out. Today, Canada is not a lawfully established Sovereign Nation. “Constitutional Conventions” is the Solution to create an accountable government for the People by The People. These fascinating hidden truths will be revealed. Join The Solution, plenty to learn. SOVEREIGN FOREVER SHARE, LIKE & RT Any and all information from Constitutional Conventions must be given to the original author by citing the source for original content http://constitutionalconventions.ca/ Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 https://rumble.com/v4govwc-facts-vs-fiction-know-who-owns-the-land-not-canada-or-their-corrup-peice-of.html A beneficiary is a person (or entity) who is designated to receive the benefits of property owned by someone else. https://www.ontario.ca/page/get-or-replace-ontario-birth-certificate CIPO online \https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/canadian-intellectual-property-office/en Alberta Live Birth Cerificate https://formsmgmt.gov.ab.ca/Public/DVS11163B.xdp BC Live Birth Order certificates and copies https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/life-events/order-certificates-copies Canadian Intellectual Property Office https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/canadian-intellectual-property-office/en B PROOF OF CLAIM A beneficiary is a person (or entity) who is designated to receive the benefits of property owned by someone else. Rights Doc. 4 WE are all born with free will and unalienable rights. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law’ Consent makes the contract Adhesion contracts are not contracts because there was no consent, they are considered as gifts. We do not require any corporate created rights, such as the Charter of Rights and Freedom provided by the Government of Canada Corporation and/or ICCPR provided by the United Nations Corporation. If anyone claims to have jurisdiction over, you and/or requests payment request a copy of the contract. Government Corporations Government Services Corporations doing business as Government of Canada and/or the government of any provinces can only create rules (statutes) that only apply to their employees, franchisees, officers and dependents. Their rules (statutes) do not apply to the people in general. That is why the rules they create (statutes) are referred to as “public policy”. We do not require any corporate created rights, such as the Charter of Rights and Freedom provided by the Government of Canada Corporation and/or ICCPR provided by the United Nations Corporation. Women and men living in Canada are not subject to any Public Policies, mandates, or acts of legislation promoted by any commercial or municipal corporation for its officers and employees. We should not vote in private corporate shareholder elections sponsored by Canada Inc., Province of _____ Inc., or any other foreign corporation. All Acts, Bills and statutes created by the Government of Canada and/or any of the provincial governments only apply to “person”. The definition of person in Black’s Law Dictionary Fifth Edition on page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being ( i.e. natural person ) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words, if I say the basket includes apples and oranges you will not find any other type of fruit in the basket. As plainly stated in Black’s Law dictionary, anything that applies to person only applies to a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Does not apply to men or women! The Government of Canada and Government of all provinces are Crown for profit Corporations. The Prime Minister and/or the Premiers receive their orders from the shareholders of the Crown Corporation. They are the C.E.O.s/officers of the Crown Corporations. They carry out the orders that are relayed to them by the Governor General and/or the Lieutenant Governor. They (politicians) are in place to take the blame for the harm that is done to the people. They are replaced every four years with someone who claims that he/she is going to right the wrongs that were created, but nothing changes they carry out the orders provided by the shareholders as the previous C.E.O.s. Four years later they are blamed and replaced. PERSONS All Acts, Bills and statutes created by the Government of Canada and/or any of the provincial governments only apply to “person”. The definition of person in Black’s Law Dictionary Fifth Edition on page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being (i.e. natural person ) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words, if I say the basket includes apples and oranges you will not find any other type of fruit in the basket. As plainly stated in Black’s Law dictionary, anything that applies to person only applies to a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Does not apply to men or women _________________________________________________________ Name written in all capital letters The governing book of the English language is “The Oxford Styles Manual” which sometimes refers to “The Chicago Manual of Style” also The Oxford Manual of Style. All Uppercase text, all caps, or gloss is listed in the style's manuals under “foreign - language” , named ”Ancient-Latin” or Dog Latin. All Caps are not defined or recognized in meaning. All Caps is not English although you may think you are able to read it as English it is in fact, a calculated deception to be read separated from the rest of the “Document”. All Uppercase text has no lawful grammatical jurisdiction with common English and is a foreign language, headed under “Ancient-Latin”. (The Chicago Manual of Style, 16th Edition, 11:144-47). Glossa is two or more languages on a legal document. Glossa is a poisonous gloss which corrupts the essence of a text( Black’s Law Dictionary page 621 5th Edition) “Glossa” is also used to conceal or confuse the real facts in order to confuse, in order to gain tacit consent. A name written in all capital letters is written in dog Latin or is known as systemic text “a thing” created by the employees of the crown corporation, Therefore the Crown Corporation owns the creation. If you claim that the name written in all capital letters, is, you. You are admitting you are the property of the Crown Corporation (a slave). Cestui Que Vie Trust 's beneficiary is the name in all capital letters which is the property of the Crown Corporation, it is not you. All governments (corporations) and businesses such as banks and others that write your name in all capital letters are committing constructive fraud and conversion. (Engaged in criminal activity) ___________________________________________________ City, Municipality, Village et al Address Date TO: Mayor, CAO, CEO, Councillors et al FROM: The men and women living therein, The enclosed documentation: 1) Proof of Incorporation of the following entities; from Dunn & Bradstreet or EDGAR Search U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Note: the following are government services corporations’ (dba( "doing business as,") Government of Canada, EDGAR (CIK 0000230098) ; Government of British Columbia, EDGAR (CIK 0000836136) and (CIK 0000014306) ; Government of Alberta, EDGAR (CIK 0000810961) ; Government of Saskatchewan, EDGAR (CIK 0000203098) ; Government of Manitoba, EDGAR (CIK 0000826926) ; Ontario, EDGAR (CIK 0000074615) ; Quebec, EDGAR (0000722803) ; Province of New Brunswick, EDGAR (CIK 0000862406) ; Province of Nova Scotia, EDGAR (CIK 0000842639) 2) Copy of the Clearfield Doctrine; showing that corporations by ANY name DO NOT have the legal jurisdiction to taxation or law enforcement et al, without a consent to contract which is corporate policy when doing commerce. * Seek legal clarification and written proof to the contrary. This letter comes with the enclosed documents to ascertain the jurisdiction within our council, in which official positions are being held . Depending on the Oath, Declaration, or Covenant signed upon entering office, the positions may be operating under the "Color of Law," in a De-Facto, Un-lawful and thus ultra vires standing. This holds personal liability for anything signed on behalf of the people. There are 3 possible jurisdictions: A) Government Office: a PUBLIC OFFICE institution with full legal authority and jurisdiction to taxation, schools, infrastructure, peace keeping, hospital, courts, et al. as services, and needs of the local men and women therein. B) Having as the "Trustee" full fiduciary control of the "Trusts" set up to care for the local needs. De-jure/ lawful B) Non-Governmental Office, (NGO): a PRIVATE CORPORATE OFFICE, without the legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. This entity provides "Service Contracts," which requires contracts and consent to contract by those involved in the services. It's known as "Body Corporate," and serves "Incorporated Inhabitants." Did the men and women give consent to be incorporated? That's called FRAUD. Who is the "Head of Council" or "Global Mayor?" (“A created fiction” The Executive Control and Authority comes from the Corporation of the Province wherein we reside, and to which your office would receive the Acts, Statutes, Bylaws et al directly, through downloads from the corporation and are corporate policies not district policies. De-facto/ un-lawful/FRAUD C) Public/Private/Partnerships, (PPP): an International Entity one which downloads "FOREIGN," Corporate policies, UN/United Nations, WEF/ World Economic Forum, WHO/ World Health Organization et al. In this position there is also no legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. Consent to contract is a legal requirement to contract with the men and women. Did the men and women consent to Foreign Corporate Policies and occupation in the community without knowledge or consent? Are the United Nations Sustainable Goals/SDG's, Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 policies being implemented? Who has fiduciary control over the local Trusts as their Trustee? Who is the "Head of Council," and "Council of the Whole." “A fiction” De-Facto, un-lawful/FRAUD These are jurisdictional questions that are important to ascertain because through the stroke of a pen, a man or woman is being put into extreme personal liability for the agreements and infrastructures signed on to. Furthermore, there are 3 levels of Lawful/de-jure/jurisdictions LOCAL, PROVINCIAL, and FEDERAL - Each has their sphere of lawful jurisdiction and geographical area - Each has independent legislative, fiduciary, and judicial powers - NO level can legislate for the other jurisdiction NOR has the authority to operate beyond its purview We the people have come to ascertain for ourselves the jurisdiction WE are in because the last few years have shown us that something has gone horribly awry at the local level. We the people voted for positions of service to the local jurisdiction. Was there comprehension of the meaning of the oath, declaration or covenant sworn, upon taking office? Was time given to properly peruse any documents to sign and vote on? Many of these documents were written over many years, by legal firms and lawyers, whose signatures are not within the documents...whose are! They contain legalise, a language unto itself, and is the basis for how most FRAUD has occurred. Words like person, individual, inhabitant, resident, citizen, et al have a completely different meaning in these documents. FRAUD vitiates everything. We the people intend on restoring Peace, Order, and Lawful Governance should our suspicions prove correct. We require a response by ________________________________ and expect such from our elected officials. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law, and thus consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls upon the claimant. No response is considered tacit agreement. ______________________________________________________ Regional District of Address Date TO: Board Chair, CAO, CEO, Directors et al FROM: The enclosed documentation: 1) Proof of the Incorporation of the following entities, NOTE: government services corporations (dba:"doing business as,") EDGAR Search U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; Government of Canada, (CIK 0000230098) Government of British Columbia, (CIK 0000836136) and (CIK 0000014306) Government of Alberta, (CIK 0000810961) Government of Saskatchewan, (CIK 0000203098) Government of Manitoba, (CIK 0000826926) Ontario, (CIK 0000074615) Quebec, (CIK 0000722803) Province of New Brunswick, (CIK 0000862406) Province of Nova Scotia, (CIK 0000842639) 2) Copy of The CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE; showing that Corporations by ANY name DO NOT have the legal jurisdiction to Taxation or Law Enforcement et al without consent to contract by those involved in the transaction. Personal liability is then enforceable upon those acting illegally. The enclosed documents show that the Regional District through its Incorporation may be operating under the "Color of Law" and as such is de-facto, un-lawful, and ultra-vires. This information is not hear-say nor opinion, rather they state the facts of the matter, which are; ?- What Oath, Declaration, or Covenant was signed upon the commencement of the positions in council? These matter! ?- What jurisdiction is the office under? There are 3 possible Jurisdictions; 1) Government Office: a PUBLIC OFFICE institution, with lawful de-jure status as a holder of the "PUBLIC TRUST", Trustee with Fiduciary control, and thus legal authority to the taxation of the men and women within a geographical area, and is one of "service" to the local needs; school, hospital, peace keeping, infrastructure, courts, et al. 2) Non-Governmental Office (NGO): a PRIVATE CORPORATE OFFICE, that provides "Service Contracts," and is known as a "Body Corporate" to "Incorporated Inhabitants." This jurisdiction requires Consent to Contract, is de-facto, un-lawful and as such has NO legal jurisdiction to taxation. The Executive Control and Authority comes from the corporation of the province wherein the office is located. The Acts, Statutes, Bylaws et al are downloaded to the district and are corporate policies. 3) Public/Private/Partnerships (PPP) : an INTERNATIONAL ENTITY, receiving downloads from a "FOREIGN" Corporation; United Nations, WHO/World Health Organization, WEF/World Economic Forum et al. This is also a de-facto, un-lawful jurisdiction with NO legal grounds to the taxation of men and women, and also requires Consent to Contract. NOTE: In British Columbia, as an example, The BC Assessment Authority is a CROWN Corporation, created in 1974 by the Corporation of British Columbia Inc., "in order to earn profit for the Government of British Columbia Inc., without jurisdiction nor contracts with the men and women of BC. NOTE: There are 3 levels of lawful, de-jure governance Local, Provincial and Federal - Each has their sphere of jurisdiction and geographical area - Each has independent legislative, fiduciary, and judicial powers - NO level can legislate for the other jurisdiction NOR has the authority to operate beyond its purview These 2 questions are the most important because the answer to them will establish the personal liability through the signature/autograph put upon the documents requiring a vote. Was there full comprehension of the Oath, Declaration, or Covenant signed when entering office as a Director? Was there time to peruse any documents requiring a vote? Most often these documents are many pages long and were made over many years, by legal firms and lawyers whose signatures are NOT contained therein. Whose is? Making that signature "personally" liable for the decisions made Was there full comprehension of the difference between the legal wording contained therein, and the knowledge of their meanings? Such as person, individual, constituent, citizen,et al. "Legalese" is a language unto itself and is the basis for most FRAUD, which in law vitiates everything. The men and women in our Regional District Office were empowered by the men and women, to operate under, and in a jurisdiction that is de-jure, lawful, and with a fiduciary trust, to serve the men and women of our geographical area and no other. To ensure that the needs of the local men, women, and their property were the priority and responsibility of the Regional District. So...What Office is held? Lawfully/de-jure or unlawfully and de-facto? We require an answer, on or before __________________ No answer will be considered a tacit agreement. The office of the Regional District is held by the trust of the members of our community, the neighbours and friends who voted for positions in an office to serve the community. That's why we require proof of what oath, declaration, or covenant was given. The men and women of __________________ _________________________________________________________ Notice of Demand and Trespass Proof of Jurisdiction and Contract Proof of Claim It has come to our attention, the concerned men and women, that our Educational Institutions, whose service to us is the education of our sons and daughters (hereafter named as our "property") has implemented the SOGI 123 Program without a consent to contract. HISTORY; this program began in 2007 through the ARC Foundation. A private foundation based in Vancouver, British Columbia Inc. Other corporations involved in the funding are; British Columbia Ministry of Education Inc.; British Columbia Teachers Federation Inc.; University of British Columbia Inc., and through private donations( gifts from registered charities also corporations), and the corporation of Canada Inc. Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Documents included herein: - Proof of the incorporation of Government of Canada Inc., Government of British Columbia Inc. - Copy of the "CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE", a 1942 court case, accepted worldwide because it's corporate, commerce law. Clearly stating the requirement of contracts Governments lose their sovereignty when they become corporations, thus no different than Canadian Tire using Canadian Tire money. - Copy of the definition of "GLOSSA", pertinent in this matter because it's a matter of concealment, meant to confuse using "text" to corrupt the real facts in order to gain tacit consent. There's no statute of limitation on fraud. - Our Mayoral, Councillor, and Regional Districts are also incorporated through the removal of many of the municipal powers in 2004 with the Local Government Act incorporated into the Community Charter, prior to this; the local mayor had full de-jure and lawful jurisdiction, in relation to our schools. - Copy of the definition of the All Capital Identity, created with the "Birth Certificate," a fiction, constructive fraud and conversion. - Copy of the 10 Points of Contract Law, made simple for comprehension on this matter. - Copy of the 12 Presumptions of Court. Included for the comprehension of status. Fundamentally, the fraud upon our property when born, vitiates any Board jurisdiction to the ownership of our property. We, the men and women who created them, own them. "He who creates owns!" A maxim in law Therefore, it is incumbent upon those who have positions on the Board to cease and desist the SOGI 123 Program which is an infringement upon the property known as our sons and daughters. Failure to do so as corporate entities, through Contract Law, we intend on exercising our jurisdiction, as is our right, to the fullest extent upon the men and women personally sitting on the Board. We strongly suggest a consultation with a lawyer, who by the way wrote this mess. "Praetextu legis injusta agens duplo puniendus" We the People DO NOT require legal Re-presentation in this matter because we're well aware of the 12 Presumptions of Court. I doubt any lawyer will be willing to assist the men and women on the Board, regardless of the facts, because through their: legalize they do deceive. Be it therefore noted, with the documents contained herein, that our claim of proof of contract and the jurisdictional fraud, put against us and our property is considered a trespass. It is the duty of men and women to discuss these delicate matters with our property within our own jurisdiction. We are not against the health and wellbeing of another's property, within their jurisdiction, rather not in the educational setting. We the People, regarding our property in the care of the educational system, again, reiterate, and declare that the burden of proof falls on the claimant. Consider the response with wisdom and discernment since we voted men and women into what we thought was a Educational Office not a Corporate Office. We require no more than 7 days for implementing the redressing of the trespass against our property, with the immediate removal of any and all literature, electronic or written, devices, toys (we use the word with baited breath) et al in relation to the SOGI 123 PROGRAM post haste. For it was through corporate policies, without contractual consent, that the trespass has been made against our property thus creating this claim against those men and women on the Board personally. Furthermore, do not be deceived into thinking that the registration of our property into the corporation rather than an educational institution voids any responsibility on the part of the men and women on the Board, as it was done in fraud. Again we'll state that fraud vitiates everything. In all fairness to the men and women on the Board, our neighbours, not the corporations involved, perhaps unaware of the situation mentioned above and the personal liability for this trespass, We the People will support the men and women in this matter of remedy, because we trusted that their service, while sitting on the Board, was to serve our property with a lawful education. No response will be considered a tacit agreement. Sincerely and without prejudice or malice We the People Autograph_______________________:________ __________________________________________________________ Statement of Claim Taxation Between the Corporation of ______________________________________ And the noted particulars on the documents included herein. The above corporation has not proved jurisdiction, consent to contract, nor provide proof of a contract to claim the monies expected in taxation, hence tacit agreement to this claim. Who claims this debt be true, who claims this debt to due? Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Three requirements were made in writing to the Corporations Finance Minister to provide said proof, and are included in this document. Furthermore, copies of the Clearfield Doctrine, EDGAR # for the Corporation involved, Regina-v-John Anthony Hill 12 May, 2011 at Southwark Crown Court, Case # T20107746, (the Queen declared, "Lawfully NOT valid Monarch, hence Charles the III too),and "Glossa," (see Black's Law) corrupts the essence of the text presented on your documents. This refusal of consent to contract extends from this day forward, as noted with receipt of this document, until such a date in the future when there is a de-jure government upon the landmass commonly known worldwide as Canada, British Columbia, et al. Autograph _________________________:___________________________ Dated this day _______________________________________________________ Proof of Claim Re: Property Tax; Contract and Proof of Consent to Contract Between the Corporation of ___________________________________________________ and _____________________________________________________________________________ Regarding the property registered as; ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ It is required and incumbent upon the Corporations Minister of Finance, to provide proof of jurisdiction as a corporation, to taxation without full disclosure of the facts, and consent to contract, as per contract law. See: The Clearfield Doctrine; Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. 363 Syllabus CLEARFIELD TRUST CO. et al. v. UNITED STATES CERTIORARI to the CIRCUIT COURT of APPEALS for the THIRD CIRCUIT No. 490 Argued February 5, 1943 Decided March 1, 1943(and accepted worldwide when conducting commerce) Further to the above noted court case, this requirement will be expected within 7 days receipt of this claim for proof of the jurisdictional obligation by the corporation to taxation to the property noted herein. Who claims this debt be true, who claims this debt be due? Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Property Taxes have been paid previously without consent to contract, due to the fraud perpetrated without full disclosure of the fact that the corporation mentioned herein, was not a lawful government with the de-jure jurisdiction to taxation, thus Ultra-Vires. Rather, a corporation whose name included the words "government," which is fraud based on Black's Law Dictionary, any edition. No response will be confirmation of a tacit agreement to the above. Thanking you in advance, Autograph: _________________________:_____________________________ Dated this day: ______________________________________ ______________________________________________________ STATEMENT of CLAIM Date:_____________________ STATE of TITLE CERTIFICATE: Certificate number________________________________________ Land Title Office__________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ Title Number______________________________________________ Registered Owner__________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Taxation Authority__________________________________________ Description of Land__________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Charges, Liens and Interests_____________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ Proof of contract is required to provide evidence of any claim made upon the aforementioned property; taxation; land use; water use; structures and buildings above, on, or below the land; any and all animals thereon; any and all chattles upon said land; et al, provide proof of any contractual obligation having been made with respect to said land. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law, and thus consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. (See: Regina-v-John Anthony Hill 12 May, 2011 at Southwark Crown Court, Case # T20107746, in which the Queen was declared to be a "Lawfully NOT Valid Monarch." Hence, neither is Charles the III) (See: Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. 363, Syllabus. Clearfield trust Co.et al. v. United States, Certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.No. 490. Argued February 5, 1943 Decided March 1, 1943 ; and accepted worldwide when conducting commerce) The requirement to provide Proof of Contract within this Statement of Claim, is expected within ____________days from receipt of the documentation herein. No response will be considered a tacit agreement to the above. Autograph_________________________:_______________________ :GLOSSA: ~ The 'Born-Date' Vs. the 'Registration-Date' Does your Birth Certificate identify YOU as TWO people, not one? (You is plural, one and another) Have you ever wondered why your SURNAME is written using the ALL UPPERCASE TEXT? Put simply, 'you' are using a ‘Legal’ name and this is fraud. See the ‘name’ is actually split up into separate entities – The Christian-name and The ‘Surname’. You register these names to the Crown Corporation LTD. as their Property by your Birth Certificate which is given a bond number. Your physical value is used as collateral for these bonds allowing the United Kingdom LTD. to take out loans from private Banks, such as 'Bank of England' and profit is made by way of legal fines (Acts & Statutes), bills and taxation. – Hence money is no longer backed by Gold or Silver, but by our physical value or man power. The UNITED KINGDOM LTD is a privately owned Corporation-ship. And corporations are considered ‘ships’ and they are governed under the law of the sea, known as Maritime Law. There is no real 'ship' but a 'document-vessel' – which in our case was our Birth Certificate Created by the Doctor when s/he ‘docked’ you. TAKE NOTICE Whenever you encounter the Legal Document (document-vessel) you will notice that your surname (or sometimes all of your names) will be written using the ALL-UPPERCASE TEXT. This is no coincidence - the ALL UPPERCASE text is not defined or recognized in The Oxford Styles Manual, (the governing book of the English language) – meaning that although you may be able to read it as English, it is in fact, NOT English. The all CAPS or Gloss can be found within the 'Oxford Styles Manual', under 'foreign-languages', named 'Ancient-Latin' The main place this ALL-UPPERCASE text is found to be defined as a language, is when American Sign Language (ASL), a signing language used for the deaf, is written. ASL can be defined in the book ‘The Chicago Manual of Style’ under the foreign-languages header: American Sign Language (ASL) compound signs, 10.152 and ‘glosses, 10.147’. Thus, defining this text as a foreign language Further going on to say that when written, it has no 1-to-1 correspondence with any other languages on the document. The all CAPS or Gloss is also found in the 'Oxford Styles Manual', under foreign-languages, 'Ancient-Latin', however as the all caps UK LTD is registered in [Washington D.C[, they seem to be using the 'Chicago Manual of Style' , not the Oxford. Putting two or more languages onto a legal document is known in law as a ‘Glossa’. Black's Law Dictionary defines: 'GLOSSA' - “It is a poisonous gloss which corrupts the essence of the text”. Meaning that by using a Glossa in a document they are trying to conceal or confuse the real facts. If you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL-UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL if you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALLf you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So, you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL-UPPER CASE. If you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL-UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So, you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL Soon you will realize that virtually all court orders, speeding tickets and most other legal documents actually make no sense whatsoever. They only make sense when we make the assumption that it is all plain English and we read it as one, once you take one away from the other – it renders the document useless. Seeing as the ‘government’ is simply a privately owned Corporation, it can only impose fines and acts upon other corporations. And by tricking us to registering our names as a corporate entity and then tricking us into thinking these names are physically us, it manages to get us to represent the corporately registered name and therefore bear the burden of fines and policies. This is a crime known as “personage”. Hand in hand with “personage” comes a crime known as “barratry” which is knowingly bringing false claims into court- This is what police, politicians, judges are doing daily. The Birth-Certificate, Two-Names, Two-Dates and Two-Languages? Capitis Diminutio Maxima (Name in ALL CAPITALS) For the purposes of understanding one's legal or commercial status under the Admiralty system (the law system used in England, Canada and much of the US), it is necessary to examine the curious use of all CAPS -Capitis Diminutio Maxima- in legal and domestic income tax forms, credit cards & statements, loans, mortgages, speeding & parking tickets, car documents, road tax, court summons etc. While seemingly a trite concern, this apparently small detail has extremely deep significance for all of us! Gage Canadian Dictionary 1983 Sec. 4 defines Capitalize adj. as "To take advantage of - To use to one's own advantage." Black's Law Dictionary – Revised 4th Edition 1968, provides a more comprehensive definition as follows … Capitis Diminutio (meaning the diminishing of status through the use of capitalization)- In Roman law. A diminishing or abridgment of personality; a loss or curtailment of a man's status or aggregate of leg al attributes and qualifications.

In this letter he made it clear to Mr. Levesque that Quebec was, and continues to be, a sovereign nation, as do ALL provinces in Corporation of Canada.Spruce Grove, Alta., R.R. I, November 23rd, 1976. The Hon. Rene Levesque, Premier-elect, Province of Quebec, Quebec, P.Q. Dear Mr. Levesque: Congratulations on your magnificent personal victory and that of your Parti Quebecois in the recent Quebec election. As a student of Canadian constitutional history and of Canadian constitutional problems for some 40 years, I am tremendously interested in the constitutional implications of your recent political victory. For 14 years, from 1935 to 1949, it was my privilege to serve as a member of the House of Commons, from the province of Alberta. The withholding of assent to some Alberta legislation in those years by the Lieutenant-Governor and the disallowance of other Alberta legislation by the people at Ottawa, set me to investigating how these things could be. I was assisted in my studies by R. Rogers Smith, who was personally acquainted with a onetime private secretary to John A. MacDonaId at the time when the B.N.A. Act was being enacted. Through this source I have become acquainted with much information concerning the history of the B.N.A. Act which is not to be found in text books. All this information has led me to the conclusion that the existing constitutional circumstances are shocking to the point of unbelief. However, in my considered opinion, after 40 years of intensive study, these existing constitutional circumstances are of such a nature that they can be of extreme advantage to you in governing your province. I am enclosing copies of some of the addresses which I delivered in the House of Commons on the subject, as well as copies of a pamphlet by Mr. Smith, dealing with the same subject. If you have not already been made acquainted with this material, I trust it will prove enlightening and helpful to you in the constitutional considerations in which you obviously are going to become involved. Although the enclosed material should give you a clear outline of what I conceive to be your present standing constitutionally as a province, 1 would like to give you a brief summary of what I believe to be your present position. So far as separation. is concerned, rather than it being necessary to seek separation rights through a referendum, THE PROVINCE OF QUEBEC IS ALREADY COMPLETELY CONSTITUTIONALLY SEPARATED FROM THE REST OF CANADA ! ! ! ! This is equally true of every other province in Canada and has been so since December 11, 1931, through the Statute of Westminster. HOW CAN YOU BE DIVORCED IF YOU HAVE NEVER BEEN MARRIED? In other words, ever since the enactment of the Statute of Westminster in 1931, by the British Government, each of the provinces of Canada has been a completely sovereign and independent state, and because the provinces have signed nothing since then constituting a Federal Union and a Federal Government, and because no such treaty has been ratified by the people of Canada, the provinces still enjoy the status of sovereignty and are privileged to use it in any way they see fit. As you will observe from the enclosed addresses, I quote eminent Canadian constitutional authorities as suggesting that the only and logical solution to the existing constitutional circumstances is the drafting and the adoption of a proper federal constitution in which the provinces can reserve for themselves any and all powers necessary to enable them to govern their provinces successfully. I am sure you can appreciate that if this were done, you could solve your economic and other problems in Quebec without resorting to separation. I feel sure that having the ability to solve your problems and still remain constitutionally part of the country of Canada, would be much more satisfactory to your supporters as well as to others within your province. The following is a summary of the reasons for the things I have just stated: 1. At the time of Confederation movement in Canada, the Provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick desired to form a Federal Union. 2. The Quebec Resolutions of 1864 provided for a Federal Union. 3. The Bill drafted by the Canadian delegates at the London Conference in 1866 also provided for a Federal Union. 4. The Colonial Office of the Imperial Parliament was not disposed to grant the Provinces of Canada their request for a Federal Union. 5. The British North America Act enacted by the Imperial Parliament carried out neither the spirit nor the terms of the Quebec Resolutions. 6. Canada did not become a Federal Union or a Confederation under the British North America Act, but rather a United Colony. The privilege of federation, therefore, was still a future privilege for the provinces of Canada. 7. The Parliament of Canada did not become the government of Canada, much less a federal government; it became merely the central legislature of a United Colony, a legislative body whose only power was that of aiding and advising the Governor-General as agent of the Imperial Parliament. 8. The British North America Act, as enacted by the Imperial Parliament, was not a constitution but merely an act of the Imperial Parliament, which united four colonies in Canada into one colony, with the supreme authority still remaining in the hands of the British government. 9. The privilege of federating became realizable for the provinces of Canada, only through the enactment of the Statute of Westminster on December 11, 1931. Through this statute, the Imperial Parliament relinquished to the people of Canada their sovereign rights, and through them to their Provincial governments as their most direct agents. 10. Since December 11, 1931, the Provinces of Canada have not acted on their newly acquired status in the forming of a Federal Union, nor have the people of Canada ratified a constitution. Therefore, the original proposition, namely: that all power to govern in Canada resides at the moment, with the Provinces of Canada; and, that all power legally remains there until such time as the Provinces sign an agreement and ratify a constitution whereby they may delegate such powers as they wish to a central government of their own creation. In the meantime, Canada exists as ten political units without a political superior. Should you consider that there is merit in the information, which I have given you, I would be very happy to meet with you personally to discuss in greater depth the implications of the unprecedented constitutional circumstances prevailing in Canada. Yours for a better Canada, Walter F. Kuhl [Member of Parliament for Jasper-Edson, 1935-1949]

Subscribe thank You https://www.youtube.com/@constitutionalconventions6240 Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 Welcome to Constitutional Conventions Educational website with some very import facts about Canada which, technically, began with the British North America Act of 1867. https://constitutionalconventions.ca/ For Canadians, the answers to the following questions should be common knowledge as the content should have been mandatory learning in our education system. There is a reason it is not, and Constitutional Conventions will expose all of this. “There are two ways to be fooled. One is doing No research and the other is to repeat the regurgitated indoctrination to repeat the history of Lies” Dallas K Hills So… here are 11 very important questions that you need to ask yourself: Where are the Articles of Confederation, if Canada had confederated in 1867 and is a sovereign nation? info@constitutionalconventions.ca Why was Canada known as the “Dominion of Canada” a British colony until 1938, if Canada had confederated in 1867 and is a sovereign nation? info@constitutionalconventions.ca Why in 1867 was the BNA act created to be Letters Patent for a Governor General to the Dominion of Canada if Canada had confederated and is a sovereign nation? info@constitutionalconventions.ca Why in 1893, would the British Parliament deem it necessary to repeal certain sections of the BNA act, with the “Statute Law Revisions act” if Canada confederated in 1867 and is a sovereign nation? info@constitutionalconventions.ca Why in 1931 would the British parliament create the “Statute of Westminster” to nullify the Dominion of Canada, if Canada confederated in 1867 and is a sovereign nation? info@constitutionalconventions.ca Why in 1946 did a foreign Monarch, King George VI appoint a representative for the UK, a Governor General and then command the Parliament of Canada to create Letters Patent and command the PM at that time to sign on his behalf those Letters Patent in 1947 for his Governor General, if Canada confederated in 1867 and is a Sovereign Nation? info@constitutionalconventions.ca Why did PM Trudeau in 1982 have the government create the “Canada Bill” and then take that Bill to a foreign Monarch and have her parliament pass that Bill as the “Canada act, 1982” if Canada confederated 153 years earlier and is a sovereign nation? info@constitutionalconventions.ca Why do Prime Ministers and other officials when sworn into office here in Canada, swear their allegiance to a foreign monarch, Queen Elizabeth, and not to the people of Canada if Canada confederated in 1867 and is a sovereign nation? info@constitutionalconventions.ca If Canada is a sovereign nation, why does the Government of Canada in their Interpretations act define Canada as the internal waters and territorial seas if Canada confederated in 1867? info@constitutionalconventions.ca Why was it necessary in 1990 to sue a member of the federal parliament, J. Littlechild MP, to force him to do his duty to his constituents and have the courts rule against his constituents, if Canada had confederated in 1867 and is a sovereign Nation? info@constitutionalconventions.ca Why in the “Constitution act, 1867” of Canada is there no clause that allows for land for the Government of Canada to become a sovereign nation if Canada Confederated in 1867 and is a sovereign nation? info@constitutionalconventions.ca If the Sovereigns in the 12 sovereign nations (Provinces and Territories all have Act they refer to as Constitution Act) could awaken to what the Government of Canada Inc. really is (master that owns them upon their ignorance and consent) and take the blinders off put there by those who call themselves the government, we could all have a bright future. “Constitutional Conventions has the Solution to actually do this! Your Invited, together we will correct the false History” – Dallas K Hills The Government of Canada Inc. has painted itself as some religious fairy tales set out to save everyone and keep them safe. Once people realize the truth and claim ownership over their land, they can truly be free. Let us help you see the truth, at Constitutional Conventions website. info@constitutionalconventions.ca “You never change things by fighting in their existing corrupt System. To change something, build a Solution that makes the existing corrupt system obsolete” – Dallas K Hills These are historical Facts to educate Canadians the Solution to end the Lie, and establish a True Sovereign Nation with Liberty , Freedom , Prosperity, Property Rights, and Land Rights. Join the Solution – Share to Family and Friends

Subscribe thank You https://www.youtube.com/@constitutionalconventions6240 Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 Good afternoon Darcy, Thanks for providing your delegation form (attached) earlier this week. In reviewing the document (as well as the information package provided earlier to all members of Council), I wanted to confirm the desired resolution you are seeking. If I understand the request correctly, you are hoping to provide guidance to Council on the legitimacy (or lack there-of) of Council’s jurisdiction. If that understanding is correct, I can confirm that local governments in BC are creations of the Province, and if there is concern about validity of jurisdiction, that concern is best directed to the Provincial Government, as it is outside of the authority of Council to change. Our Procedure Bylaw guides our delegation process and matters that fall outside of the scope of Council’s authority are typically not permitted. If I am off-base on the purpose and desired outcome of the delegation, please let me know and I can review further (I will be out of the office for a week or so, but can review upon my return). I can also confirm that even if the delegation is in-scope, we cannot extend the time past 10 minutes as you requested (though additional time can be provided at the meeting by the Mayor for Council to ask the delegation questions). Sincerely, RevisedLARGE - Copy Ross Coupé Corporate Officer 250.392.1773 | kisspng-computer-icons-fax-encapsulated-postscript-clip-ar-fax-icon-5ae0e4186c9a48 250.392.4408 rcoupe@williamslake.ca www.williamslake.ca City of Williams Lake 450 Mart Street, Williams Lake, BC V2G 1N3 I am grateful to work on the traditional territory of the T’exelcemc people of the Secwepemc Nation. The information contained in this email message, including any attached documents, is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended for the sole use of the recipient(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient(s), any review, use, copying, distribution or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender, and delete and destroy all copies of this email message. Good evening Ross, You must be confused. I did not ask for a "Delegation Request", the MAYOR did! It was the mayor who told you to schedule a meeting with the council and to be sure of unlimited time for this important issue, and to be made public. I have no desired resolution, that is up to the men and women who were voted into a "Public Office", NOT a Public/Private/Partnership with United Nations foreign influence on local matters. If you did read the package, with complete truthful evidence therein, then you are well aware of the situation the City mayor and councillors find themselves in. They are in an un-lawful, de-facto, and ultra-vires situation, (operating under the color of law) without the lawful or legal jurisdiction to taxation et al without contracts from the people, giving consent to contract with the corporations of BC, Canada, City of Williams Lake, Cariboo Regional District, and the corporation of the United Nations amongst others. Going to the province of BC Inc is pointless since they too are "acting" as a legal government when in fact they're just another corporation in the same unlawful jurisdiction as the city is. Contract makes the law and consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls upon the claimant. The City is claiming to have jurisdiction. In this case the City of Williams Lake is asking for taxes et al without contract or consent to contract. I see that CAO Gary Muraca Cc (unelected and 2nd in command, if not 1st) is well aware of the situation, as are all the other unelected CAO's in the corporations of Canada Inc. et al. The point of the matter is that the corporation known as the City of Williams Lake CAN NOT collect tax, enforce Acts, Statutes, By-laws et al without contract. Gary Muraca, the CFO, and the city lawyer know this too. So do I. This is my community, my family and others built this community and in law; "He who creates owns." There's enough fraud going around at every level. Adhesion Contracts are not contracts, tacit contracts made without disclosure, amongst other things are fraud, conversion, and extortion. I need not add more, although I most likely could. Government Service Corporations doing business as Government of Canada and/or the government of British Columbia et al can only create rules (statutes) that only apply to their employees, franchisees, officers, and dependants. Their rules do not apply to the people in general. That is why the rules they create (statutes) are referred to as "Public Policy." All Acts, Bills, and Statutes created by any level of government corporations only apply to "person." Black's Law Dictionary 5th Edition, page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being (i.e. natural person) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnership, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of the another. Thus, it does not apply to men and women, to whom this trespass is occurring. Maybe you'd best take this up with a lawyer, they're well aware we're operating under Maritime Law, the law of commerce, which requires contracts. (Praetextu legis injusta agens duplo puniendus) As I told the Mayor, it's his neighbors and friends who voted for what we comprehended was a public, de-jure, and lawful office, to serve the local men and women. Is CAO Muraca's signature on all the documents that our local men and women in office are responsible for with theirs? Their Oath of Office, if I recall correctly, states; "I will be accountable for the decisions that I make, and the actions that I take, in the course of my duties." They swear this Oath to the Corporation of British Columbia and Canada as noted on the top left side, an NGO. (non-governmental office) Where is the CAO Oath of Office? Yet he seems to wield great power in Williams Lake as they do elsewhere. Interesting. Needless to say, fraud, extortion, and numerous other crimes are being committed against the good men and women of my area. The future will tell how the people will respond when they know of these crimes, especially the one in which the United Nations, through their WHO/ World Health Organization committed great harms, death, and the sterilization of their children. There's no anger than that of a parent so grieved. Personally, I wouldn't want to have to explain that one. And it fell upon Williams Lake with the stroke of a mayor's pen. There's no statute of limitation on fraud. Simply Ross, I care. I care about my Village. I grew up here and I see a storm a coming. How we deal with that depends on the honesty and courage of all. If you can't give me what our mayor asked for then We the People already have our answer. De-facto, unlawful, ultra-vires, and with Foreign influence. Not looking good for the good men and women we voted in. May god have mercy upon their souls, they're going to need it. In all sincerity, without any malice, and always with love and respect in my heart, Darcy Martens, woman All rights reserved. To: mayor@williamslake.ca <mayor@williamslake.ca>; Angie Delainey <adelainey@williamslake.ca>; gmuraca@williamslake.ca <gmuraca@williamslake.ca>; vschwartz@williamslake.ca <vschwartz@williamslake.ca> Subject: Fw: Delegation Request To the Enclosed. Specifically, Mayor Rathor. (Any definitions on words, and noted herein, come from Black's Law 6th Edition, pages for easy reference) This e-mail with the enclosed responses is being sent to you because you've been Cc'd or have been given this information three times already, most recently in the documented proof sent and received on the 20th of February. I received confirmation of such in February. The fact that it was or wasn't read is not my problem, it's yours. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Ross Coupe in his e-mail to me confirmed what I discussed with the Mayor on March 11th at City Hall. "Council's jurisdiction," and "I can confirm that local governments in BC are creations of the Province." Black's Law page 366: Create, To bring into being; to cause to exist; to produce; as, to create a trust, to create a corporation. The proof of contract law with corporations, now proven through Ross, has been presented with the Clearfield Doctrine, and in paragraphs 4-5 in my response. Contracts make the law; consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls upon the claimant. Other legal terms necessary to comprehend regarding this situation are: Pages 265-266, Color of Law, The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal right. Misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because wrongdoer is clothed with authority of state, is action taken under "color of state law." inter alia Page 416, De facto, or a state of affairs which must be accepted for all practical purposes, but is illegal or illegitimate. Thus, an officer, King, or government de facto is one who is in actual possession of the office or supreme power, but by usurpation, or without lawful title, inter alia Page 1545, Usurpation of franchise or office, The unjustly intruding upon or exercising any office, franchise, or liberty belonging to another. ( He who creates owns, the men and women of Williams Lake built the village through their work and taxation, therefore, it is the men and women who OWN and thus, are the ones being trespassed upon, having every right to a de jure lawful office of the Mayor, Councilor, or Director) Black's Law Dictionary 11th Edition, page 537, De jure, as a matter of law, existing by right or according to law. (LAW; Land Air Water, "water" refers to Maritime Law, the law of commerce, the law of contracts.) Page 1522, Ultra vires, An act performed without any authority to act on subject. By doctrine of ultra vires, a contract made by a corporation beyond the scope of its corporate powers is unlawful. ( Where is the disclosure? See: paragraphs 4-5 in my response, also The10 Points of Contract Law) et al Pages 660-663, Fraud, An intentional perversion of truth for the purpose of inducing another in reliance upon it to part with some valuable thing belonging to him or to surrender a legal right. inter alia (This began when we, and our sons and daughters were "born", through the fraud of the Bond Birth Certificate, creating the slaves we are today, and so on, and so on.) Page 585, Extortion, The obtaining of property from another induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right. inter alia Page 332, Conversion, An unauthorized assumption and exercise of right of ownership over goods or personal chattels belonging to another, to the alteration of their condition or the exclusion of the owner's rights. inter alia (Note here, all the foreclosures of property due to taxation fraud, not good on behalf of the corporation of Williams Lake, having done so under all the definitions above.) Page 1523, Unalienable Right, Inalienable; incapable of being aliened, that is, sold or transferred. Rights which can never be abridged because they are so fundamental. Page 572, Exercised Dominion, Open acts and conduct relative to land as evidence of claim of right of absolute possession, use, and ownership. "All Rights Reserved" Look that up for yourself. As I stated to the mayor on March 11th, and within the packages to all councillors, CAO Muraca, and the board of the Cariboo Regional District and their CAO; What jurisdiction are you in as a corporation that allows you legal means to taxation, by-laws etcetera, without Consent to Contract? You are all in serious trouble as are those before you operating under the color of law. The men and women in Williams Lake have the Unalienable Right to lawful governance. ( Authorized by, and accountable to, We the People) Mayor Walt Cobb was in office when the WHO/ World Health Organization overstepped their authority as a Foreign Corporation and mandated needles in the arms of the people, without consent! It doesn't matter what CEO Brian Mulroney signed at the Rio Summit in 1992, because that fell upon the corporation and its employees, against their will too. Where in their employment contracts did they agree to give up their bodily autonomy when accepting employment? This too is coming your way and to the other officers and officials in the municipalities worldwide, who by their signatures allowed this treason? Page 1501, Treason, consists of two elements: adherence to the enemy, and rendering him aid and comfort. It was my desire to enlighten my neighbours and friends, who sought and gained office within our geographical area. Knowledge is power and he who has it, wields it with either justice or deception. Operating in ultra vires can be remedied. The conversation must be had though. Swearing Oaths without "Certainty of Meaning and Full Disclosure" (10 Points of Contract Law) affects you too, when done in deception, fraud, and others. Suffice it to say, I know you know. Others know too, worldwide. Free will is a right we all possess. Use your wisely and with discernment. Respectfully then and respectfully now, Darcy Martens All rights reserved.

Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 Good afternoon Darcy, Thanks for providing your delegation form (attached) earlier this week. In reviewing the document (as well as the information package provided earlier to all members of Council), I wanted to confirm the desired resolution you are seeking. If I understand the request correctly, you are hoping to provide guidance to Council on the legitimacy (or lack there-of) of Council’s jurisdiction. If that understanding is correct, I can confirm that local governments in BC are creations of the Province, and if there is concern about validity of jurisdiction, that concern is best directed to the Provincial Government, as it is outside of the authority of Council to change. Our Procedure Bylaw guides our delegation process and matters that fall outside of the scope of Council’s authority are typically not permitted. If I am off-base on the purpose and desired outcome of the delegation, please let me know and I can review further (I will be out of the office for a week or so, but can review upon my return). I can also confirm that even if the delegation is in-scope, we cannot extend the time past 10 minutes as you requested (though additional time can be provided at the meeting by the Mayor for Council to ask the delegation questions). Sincerely, RevisedLARGE - Copy Ross Coupé Corporate Officer 250.392.1773 | kisspng-computer-icons-fax-encapsulated-postscript-clip-ar-fax-icon-5ae0e4186c9a48 250.392.4408 rcoupe@williamslake.ca www.williamslake.ca City of Williams Lake 450 Mart Street, Williams Lake, BC V2G 1N3 I am grateful to work on the traditional territory of the T’exelcemc people of the Secwepemc Nation. The information contained in this email message, including any attached documents, is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended for the sole use of the recipient(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient(s), any review, use, copying, distribution or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender, and delete and destroy all copies of this email message. Good evening Ross, You must be confused. I did not ask for a "Delegation Request", the MAYOR did! It was the mayor who told you to schedule a meeting with the council and to be sure of unlimited time for this important issue, and to be made public. I have no desired resolution, that is up to the men and women who were voted into a "Public Office", NOT a Public/Private/Partnership with United Nations foreign influence on local matters. If you did read the package, with complete truthful evidence therein, then you are well aware of the situation the City mayor and councillors find themselves in. They are in an un-lawful, de-facto, and ultra-vires situation, (operating under the color of law) without the lawful or legal jurisdiction to taxation et al without contracts from the people, giving consent to contract with the corporations of BC, Canada, City of Williams Lake, Cariboo Regional District, and the corporation of the United Nations amongst others. Going to the province of BC Inc is pointless since they too are "acting" as a legal government when in fact they're just another corporation in the same unlawful jurisdiction as the city is. Contract makes the law and consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls upon the claimant. The City is claiming to have jurisdiction. In this case the City of Williams Lake is asking for taxes et al without contract or consent to contract. I see that CAO Gary Muraca Cc (unelected and 2nd in command, if not 1st) is well aware of the situation, as are all the other unelected CAO's in the corporations of Canada Inc. et al. The point of the matter is that the corporation known as the City of Williams Lake CAN NOT collect tax, enforce Acts, Statutes, By-laws et al without contract. Gary Muraca, the CFO, and the city lawyer know this too. So do I. This is my community, my family and others built this community and in law; "He who creates owns." There's enough fraud going around at every level. Adhesion Contracts are not contracts, tacit contracts made without disclosure, amongst other things are fraud, conversion, and extortion. I need not add more, although I most likely could. Government Service Corporations doing business as Government of Canada and/or the government of British Columbia et al can only create rules (statutes) that only apply to their employees, franchisees, officers, and dependants. Their rules do not apply to the people in general. That is why the rules they create (statutes) are referred to as "Public Policy." All Acts, Bills, and Statutes created by any level of government corporations only apply to "person." Black's Law Dictionary 5th Edition, page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being (i.e. natural person) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnership, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of the another. Thus, it does not apply to men and women, to whom this trespass is occurring. Maybe you'd best take this up with a lawyer, they're well aware we're operating under Maritime Law, the law of commerce, which requires contracts. (Praetextu legis injusta agens duplo puniendus) As I told the Mayor, it's his neighbors and friends who voted for what we comprehended was a public, de-jure, and lawful office, to serve the local men and women. Is CAO Muraca's signature on all the documents that our local men and women in office are responsible for with theirs? Their Oath of Office, if I recall correctly, states; "I will be accountable for the decisions that I make, and the actions that I take, in the course of my duties." They swear this Oath to the Corporation of British Columbia and Canada as noted on the top left side, an NGO. (non-governmental office) Where is the CAO Oath of Office? Yet he seems to wield great power in Williams Lake as they do elsewhere. Interesting. Needless to say, fraud, extortion, and numerous other crimes are being committed against the good men and women of my area. The future will tell how the people will respond when they know of these crimes, especially the one in which the United Nations, through their WHO/ World Health Organization committed great harms, death, and the sterilization of their children. There's no anger than that of a parent so grieved. Personally, I wouldn't want to have to explain that one. And it fell upon Williams Lake with the stroke of a mayor's pen. There's no statute of limitation on fraud. Simply Ross, I care. I care about my Village. I grew up here and I see a storm a coming. How we deal with that depends on the honesty and courage of all. If you can't give me what our mayor asked for then We the People already have our answer. De-facto, unlawful, ultra-vires, and with Foreign influence. Not looking good for the good men and women we voted in. May god have mercy upon their souls, they're going to need it. In all sincerity, without any malice, and always with love and respect in my heart, Darcy Martens, woman All rights reserved. To: mayor@williamslake.ca <mayor@williamslake.ca>; Angie Delainey <adelainey@williamslake.ca>; gmuraca@williamslake.ca <gmuraca@williamslake.ca>; vschwartz@williamslake.ca <vschwartz@williamslake.ca> Subject: Fw: Delegation Request To the Enclosed. Specifically, Mayor Rathor. (Any definitions on words, and noted herein, come from Black's Law 6th Edition, pages for easy reference) This e-mail with the enclosed responses is being sent to you because you've been Cc'd or have been given this information three times already, most recently in the documented proof sent and received on the 20th of February. I received confirmation of such in February. The fact that it was or wasn't read is not my problem, it's yours. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Ross Coupe in his e-mail to me confirmed what I discussed with the Mayor on March 11th at City Hall. "Council's jurisdiction," and "I can confirm that local governments in BC are creations of the Province." Black's Law page 366: Create, To bring into being; to cause to exist; to produce; as, to create a trust, to create a corporation. The proof of contract law with corporations, now proven through Ross, has been presented with the Clearfield Doctrine, and in paragraphs 4-5 in my response. Contracts make the law; consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls upon the claimant. Other legal terms necessary to comprehend regarding this situation are: Pages 265-266, Color of Law, The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal right. Misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because wrongdoer is clothed with authority of state, is action taken under "color of state law." inter alia Page 416, De facto, or a state of affairs which must be accepted for all practical purposes, but is illegal or illegitimate. Thus, an officer, King, or government de facto is one who is in actual possession of the office or supreme power, but by usurpation, or without lawful title, inter alia Page 1545, Usurpation of franchise or office, The unjustly intruding upon or exercising any office, franchise, or liberty belonging to another. ( He who creates owns, the men and women of Williams Lake built the village through their work and taxation, therefore, it is the men and women who OWN and thus, are the ones being trespassed upon, having every right to a de jure lawful office of the Mayor, Councilor, or Director) Black's Law Dictionary 11th Edition, page 537, De jure, as a matter of law, existing by right or according to law. (LAW; Land Air Water, "water" refers to Maritime Law, the law of commerce, the law of contracts.) Page 1522, Ultra vires, An act performed without any authority to act on subject. By doctrine of ultra vires, a contract made by a corporation beyond the scope of its corporate powers is unlawful. ( Where is the disclosure? See: paragraphs 4-5 in my response, also The10 Points of Contract Law) et al Pages 660-663, Fraud, An intentional perversion of truth for the purpose of inducing another in reliance upon it to part with some valuable thing belonging to him or to surrender a legal right. inter alia (This began when we, and our sons and daughters were "born", through the fraud of the Bond Birth Certificate, creating the slaves we are today, and so on, and so on.) Page 585, Extortion, The obtaining of property from another induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right. inter alia Page 332, Conversion, An unauthorized assumption and exercise of right of ownership over goods or personal chattels belonging to another, to the alteration of their condition or the exclusion of the owner's rights. inter alia (Note here, all the foreclosures of property due to taxation fraud, not good on behalf of the corporation of Williams Lake, having done so under all the definitions above.) Page 1523, Unalienable Right, Inalienable; incapable of being aliened, that is, sold or transferred. Rights which can never be abridged because they are so fundamental. Page 572, Exercised Dominion, Open acts and conduct relative to land as evidence of claim of right of absolute possession, use, and ownership. "All Rights Reserved" Look that up for yourself. As I stated to the mayor on March 11th, and within the packages to all councillors, CAO Muraca, and the board of the Cariboo Regional District and their CAO; What jurisdiction are you in as a corporation that allows you legal means to taxation, by-laws etcetera, without Consent to Contract? You are all in serious trouble as are those before you operating under the color of law. The men and women in Williams Lake have the Unalienable Right to lawful governance. ( Authorized by, and accountable to, We the People) Mayor Walt Cobb was in office when the WHO/ World Health Organization overstepped their authority as a Foreign Corporation and mandated needles in the arms of the people, without consent! It doesn't matter what CEO Brian Mulroney signed at the Rio Summit in 1992, because that fell upon the corporation and its employees, against their will too. Where in their employment contracts did they agree to give up their bodily autonomy when accepting employment? This too is coming your way and to the other officers and officials in the municipalities worldwide, who by their signatures allowed this treason? Page 1501, Treason, consists of two elements: adherence to the enemy, and rendering him aid and comfort. It was my desire to enlighten my neighbours and friends, who sought and gained office within our geographical area. Knowledge is power and he who has it, wields it with either justice or deception. Operating in ultra vires can be remedied. The conversation must be had though. Swearing Oaths without "Certainty of Meaning and Full Disclosure" (10 Points of Contract Law) affects you too, when done in deception, fraud, and others. Suffice it to say, I know you know. Others know too, worldwide. Free will is a right we all possess. Use your wisely and with discernment. Respectfully then and respectfully now, Darcy Martens All rights reserved.

UNALIENABLE RIGHTS VS INALIENABLE RIGHTS UNALIENABLE RIGHTS The state of a thing or right which cannot be sold Things which are not in commerce, as public roads, are in their nature unalienable. Some things are unalienable, in consequence of particular provisions in the law forbidding their sale or transfer, as pensions granted by the government. The natural rights of life and liberty are UNALIENABLE. – Bouviers Law Dictionary, 1856 Edition “Unalienable: incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred.” – Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1523: You can not surrender, sell or transfer unalienable rights; they are a gift from the Creator to the individual and cannot under any circumstances be surrendered or taken. All individual’s have unalienable rights. INALIENABLE RIGHTS Inalienable rights: Rights which are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing such rights. – Morrison v. State, Mo. App., 252 S.W.2d 97, 101. You can surrender, sell or transfer inalienable rights if you consent either actually or constructively. Inalienable rights are not inherent in man and can be alienated by government. Persons have inalienable rights. Most state constitutions recognize only inalienable rights.

Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 Copy Right STRAWMAN & Live Birth to Become the Beneficiary Every Monday 7pm EST - ZOOM MEETING INFO: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/9259008609?pwd=WUFXQnVSZUtrMkxrRWVQWUlRS05JZz09 Meeting ID: 925 900 8609 Passcode: 547803 steve@beyondextremes.com Kawartha Freedom Group https://www.facebook.com/groups/kawarthafreedomgroup Kawartha Tax Payers Association https://www.facebook.com/groups/kltpa We The People Press https://www.wethepeoplepress.ca Canadian Rep of Straitway Truth Ministry https://www.straitway.com

Subscribe thank You https://www.youtube.com/@constitutionalconventions6240 Every Monday 7pm EST - ZOOM MEETING INFO: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/9259008609?pwd=WUFXQnVSZUtrMkxrRWVQWUlRS05JZz09 Meeting ID: 925 900 8609 Passcode: 547803 steve@beyondextremes.com Kawartha Freedom Group https://www.facebook.com/groups/kawarthafreedomgroup Kawartha Tax Payers Association https://www.facebook.com/groups/kltpa We The People Press https://www.wethepeoplepress.ca Canadian Rep of Straitway Truth Ministry https://www.straitway.com The Deputy Chief Mayor CHARLES McDONALD, Mayor DOUG ELMSILE & all 7 councilors refused to accept his request for where is all the missing $Millions of taxpayers $$from the Provincial Offence Fines PAID to City of Kawartha Lakes gone??? 10'S of $Millions???, CAO RON TAYLOR promised to provide where the money went but then refused in council! Chief William Denby requested that the CAO RON TAYLOR, Mayor DOUG ELMILE, Deputy Mayor CHARLES McDONALD & the council to Prove that they have Legal Authority in council to commit FRAUD against the people on Kawartha Lakes! The Chief asked them to prove they have authority over the land on Kawartha Lakes to sell off pprime land and pocket the $Millions from the sale of these properties?? They REFUSED to except his deputation that would have forced them to provide where the $Millions of dollars have gone?? They have no authority in council to do anything, they have all committed fraud and will be charged very soon! CAO, CHIEF, WILLIAM J DENBY, PLEASE CALL 705-879-9758 WE HAD 8 WITNESSES AT COUNCIL TODAY TO WITNESS THERE REFUSAL OF MY DEPUTATION & REQUEST FOR WHERE IS THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS YOU PEOPLE HAVE TAKEN IN FROM SELLING LAND, PAO FINES & MORE REVENUE NOT ACCOUNTED FOR ANYWHERE IN THE 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 & 2024 CITY BUDGET'S! THERE NEEDS TO BE A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION INTO CITY HALL ON ALL THESE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN TRUSTED WITH MILLIONS OF PUBLIC MONEY!

Subscribe thank You https://www.youtube.com/@constitutionalconventions6240 Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 Copy Right STRAWMAN & Live Birth to Become the Beneficiary Notice Proof of Claim and Contract, Consent to Contract Freedom of Information, Access to Records Date _______________________________ To: ______________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ and _______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ and ________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ From: _______________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ Title Number: _______________________________________ Certificate Number:___________________________________ File Reference: _______________________________________ Parcel Identifier: _____________________________________ Legal Description Lot _________________________________________________ Charges, Liens and Interests Covenants: ___________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ Nature: _______________________________________________ Registration Number: ___________________________________ Registered Owner: ______________________________________ Remarks:_______________________________________________ and Clarification to Provisions of __________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Notice to agent is notice to principal, notice to principal is notice to agent. This notice is formally served. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law and consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls upon the claimant. SEE: The 10 Points of Contract Law, enclosed. This requirement, through the Access to Information, requires the above mentioned corporations and entities to provide contractual evidence of jurisdiction,contract, contracts, and consent to contract for the above mentioned covenants, charges, liens, interests et al on the State of Title Certificate documented herein and a copy provided. The corporations noticed herein, through commerce law, must have proof of contracts. SEE: The Clearfield Doctrine, enclosed. Taxation and other infringements have been done through tacit agreement, perpetuated without full disclosure of the fact that the corporations and entities involved in this notice were operating under the "color of law," de-facto, and ultra-vires. This is fraud, extortion, and conversion inter alia. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the officers, agents et al to show the evidence of contractual obligation to the aforementioned property, the man, and/or woman noted herein. Government Services Corporations doing business as the Government of any province or territory, municipal or regional district, do not have right over the men and women on the land, no more than Canadian Tire would with their fiat money. The fact that the word "government" is in their title or documentation is "GLOSSA viperina"; text used to conceal or confuse the real facts in order to gain tacit consent, a deception, a corruption of the essence of the text. The creation of Acts, Bills, Statutes, and Legislation apply only to their employees, franchisees, officers, and dependants. These rules (statutes) do not apply to the people in general. That is why they are called "public policy." Men and women living on the land, internationally recognised as Canada et al, are not subject to any public policies, mandates, or acts of legislation promoted by any commercial or municipal corporation for its officers and employees. All Acts, Bills, Statutes, and legislation created by corporations calling themselves "governments" only apply to "person." Black's Law Dictionary 5th Edition, page 1028 states; "Person" in general usage a human being (i.e. natural person) though by statute term may include a firm,labor organization,partnerships,associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words if I say the basket of fruit includes apples and oranges you'll not find any other type of fruit. * Plainly stated in Black's Law Dictionary, ANYTHING that applies to "person" only applies to a firm, labor organization,partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. It does not apply to men and women. The corporations and entities noticed herein have 21 days to provide the evidence of claim. Documents are to be sent by registered mail to the address noted on the documents. Further to the requirement of evidence to contracts and consent to contracts, remedy is expected. The aforementioned covenants, liens, interests, inter alia, are to be removed forthwith from the State of Title Certificate. Copy of the removable is expected to be sent to the address noted. No response is a tacit agreement. The unalienable right and exercised dominion of Autograph_____________________:_______________________ Autograph_____________________:_______________________ All rights reserved

Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 Copy Right STRAWMAN & Live Birth to Become the Beneficiary Notice of Demand and Trespass Proof of Jurisdiction and Contract Proof of Claim It has come to our attention, the concerned men and women, that our Educational Institutions, whose service to us is the education of our sons and daughters (hereafter named as our "property") has implemented the SOGI 123 Program without a consent to contract. HISTORY ; This program began in 2007 through the ARC Foundation. A private foundation based in Vancouver, British Columbia Inc. Other corporations involved in the funding are; British Columbia Ministry of Education Inc.; British Columbia Teachers Federation Inc.; University of British Columbia Inc., and through private donations( gifts from registered charities also corporations), and the corporation of Canada Inc. Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Documents included herein : - Proof of the incorporation of Government of Canada Inc., Government of British Columbia Inc. - Copy of the "CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE", a 1942 court case, accepted worldwide because it's corporate, commerce law. Clearly stating the requirement of contracts. - Copy of the definition of "GLOSSA", pertinent in this matter because it's a matter of concealment, meant to confuse using "text" to corrupt the real facts in order to gain tacit consent. There's no statute of limitation on fraud. - Our Mayoral, Councillor, and Regional Districts are also incorporated through the removal of many of the municipal powers in 2004 with the Local Government Act incorporated into the Community Charter, prior to this; the local mayor had full de-jure and lawful jurisdiction, in relation to our schools. - Copy of the definition of the All Capital Identity, created with the "Birth Certificate," a fiction, constructive fraud and conversion. - Copy of the 10 Points of Contract Law, made simple for comprehension on this matter. - Copy of the 12 Presumptions of Court. Included for the comprehension of status. Fundamentally, the fraud upon our property when born, vitiates any Board jurisdiction to the ownership of our property. We, the men and women who created them, own them. "He who creates owns!" A maxim in law. Therefore, it is incumbent upon those who have positions on the Board to cease and desist the SOGI 123 Program which is an infringment upon the property known as our sons and daughters. Failure to do so as corporate entities, through Contract Law, we intend on exercising our jurisdiction, as is our right, to the fullest extent upon the men and women personally sitting on the Board. We strongly suggest a consultation with a lawyer, who by the way, wrote this mess. "Praetextu legis injusta agens duplo puniendus." We the People DO NOT require legal Re-presentation in this matter because we're well aware of the 12 Presumptions of Court. I doubt any lawyer will be willing to assist the men and women on the Board, regardless of the facts, because through their legalise they do deceive. Be it therefore noted, with the documents contained herein, that our claim of proof of contract and the jurisdictional fraud, put against us and our property is considered a trespass. It is the duty of men and women to discuss these delicate matters with our property within our own jurisdiction. We are not against the health and wellbeing of another's property, within their jurisdiction, rather not in the educational setting. We the People, regarding our property in the educational system, again, reiterate, and declare that the burden of proof falls on the claimant. Consider the response with wisdom and discernment since we voted men and women into what we thought was a Educational Office not a Corporate Office. We require no more than 7 days for implementing the redressing of the trespass against our property, with the immediate removal of any and all literature, electronic or written, devices, toys (we use the word with baited breath) et al in relation to the SOGI 123 PROGRAM post haste. For it was through corporate policies, without contractual consent, that the trespass has been made against our property thus creating this claim against those men and women on the Board personally. Furthermore, do not be deceived into thinking that the registration of our property into the corporation rather than an educational institution voids any responsibility on the part of the men and women on the Board, as it was done in fraud. Again we'll state that fraud vitiates everything. In all fairness to the men and women on the Board, our neighbours, not the corporations involved, perhaps unaware of the situation mentioned above and the personal liability for this trespass, We the People will support the men and women in this matter of remedy, because we trusted that their service, while sitting on the Board, was to serve our property with a lawful education. No response will be considered a tacit agreement. This is the unalienable right and exercised dominion of Autograph_______________________:__________________________ All rights reserved.

Subscribe thank You https://www.youtube.com/@constitutionalconventions6240 City, Municipality, Village et al Address Date TO: Mayor, CAO, CEO, Councillors et al FROM: The men and women living therein, The enclosed documentation: 1) Proof of Incorporation of the following entities; from Dunn & Bradsteet or EDGAR Search U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Note: the following are government services corporations (dba"doing business as") Government of Canada, EDGAR (CIK 0000230098) ; Government of British Columbia, EDGAR (CIK 0000836136) and (CIK 0000014306) ; Government of Alberta, EDGAR (CIK 0000810961) ; Government of Saskatchewan, EDGAR (CIK 0000203098) ; Government of Manitoba, EDGAR (CIK 0000826926) ; Ontario, EDGAR (CIK 0000074615) ; Quebec, EDGAR (0000722803) ; Province of New Brunswick, EDGAR (CIK 0000862406) ; Province of Nova Scotia, EDGAR (CIK 0000842639) 2) Copy of the Clearfield Doctrine; showing that corporations by ANY name DO NOT have the legal jurisdiction to taxation or law enforcement et al, without a consent to contract which is corporate policy when doing commerce. * Seek legal clarification and written proof to the contrary. This letter comes with the enclosed documents to ascertain the jurisdiction within our council, in which official positions are being held . Depending on the Oath, Declaration, or Covenant signed upon entering office, the positions may be operating under the "Color of Law," in a De-Facto, Un-lawful and thus ultra vires standing. This holds personal liability for anything signed on behalf of the people. There are 3 possible jurisdictions: A) Government Office: a PUBLIC OFFICE institution with full legal authority and jurisdiction to taxation, schools, infrastructure,peace keeping, hospital, courts, et al. as services, and needs of the local men and women therein. Having as the "Trustee" full fiduciary control of the "Trusts" set up to care for the local needs. De-jure/ lawful B) Non-Governmental Office, (NGO) : a PRIVATE CORPORATE OFFICE, without the legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. This entity provides "Service Contracts," which requires contracts and consent to contract by those involved in the services. It's known as "Body Corporate," and serves "Incorporated Inhabitants." Did the men and women give consent to be incorporated? That's called FRAUD. Who is the "Head of Council" or "Global Mayor?" A created fiction. The Executive Control and Authority comes from the Corporation of the Province wherein we reside, and to which your office would receive the Acts, Statutes, Bylaws et al directly, through downloads from the corporation and are corporate policies not district policies. De-facto/ un-lawful/FRAUD C) Public/Private/Partnerships, (PPP): an International Entity one which downloads "FOREIGN," Corporate policies, UN/United Nations, WEF/ World Economic Forum, WHO/ World Health Organization et al. In this position there is also no legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. Consent to contract is a legal requirement to contract with the men and women. Did the men and women consent to Foreign Corporate Policies and occupation in the community without knowledge or consent? Are the United Nations Sustainable Goals/SDG's, Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 policies being implimented? Who has fiduciary control over the local Trusts as their Trustee? Who is the "Head of Council," and "Council of the Whole." A fiction. De-Facto, un-lawful/FRAUD These are jurisdictional questions that are important to ascertain because through the stoke of a pen, a man or woman is being put into extreme personal liability for the agreements and infrastructures signed on to. Furthermore, there are 3 levels of Lawful/de-jure/jurisdictions LOCAL, PROVINCIAL, and FEDERAL - each has their sphere of lawful jurisdiction and geographical area - each has independant legislative, fiduciary, and judicial powers - NO level can legislate for the other jurisdiction NOR has the authority to operate beyond its purview We the people have come to ascertain for ourselves the jurisdiction WE are in because the last few years have shown us that something has gone horribly awry at the local level. We the people voted for positions of service to the local jurisdiction. Was there comprehension of the meaning of the oath, declaration or covenant sworn, upon taking office? Was time given to properly peruse any documents to sign and vote on? Many of these documents were written over many years, by legal firms and lawyers, whose signatures are not within the documents...whose are! They contain legalise, a language unto itself, and is the basis for how most FRAUD has occured. Words like person, individual, inhabitant, resident, citizen, et al have a completely different meaning in these documents. FRAUD vitiates everything. We the people intend on restoring Peace, Order, and Lawful Governance should our suspicions prove correct. We require a response and expect such from our elected officials. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law, and thus consent makes the contract.The burden of proof falls upon the claimant. No response is considered tacit agreement.

Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 Copy Right STRAWMAN & Live Birth to Become the Beneficiary Notice Proof of Claim to Taxation, by-laws et al Proof of Consent to Contract Date ______________________ Reference #________________ To: ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ From the property listed below: ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Notice to agent is notice to principal, notice to principal is notice to agent. This notice has been formally served. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without consent. Contract makes the law and consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls upon the Claimant. Canada Inc., British Columbia Inc., and the corporation noted herein, have by tacit consent trespassed against said property above under the color of law. Therefore, this requirement through agents, officers, franchisees, et al to provide consent to contracts or contracts regarding; taxation, land use, water use, structures and buildings (below, on, or above the land) any and all animals thereon, by-laws, machinery, equipment, and all chattels upon said land, et al. Provide proof of any contractual obligation having been given or made in regard to said land and property. See included Clearfield Doctrine United States Securities & Exchange Commission, Corporations of; Canada (CIK 0000230098) British Columbia (CIK 000083613) (CIK 0000014306) Government Service Corporations doing business as Government of Canada and/or the governments of any provinces can only create rules (statutes) that only apply to their employees, franchisees, officers, and dependants. Their rules do not apply to the people in general. That is why the rules they create (statutes) are referred to as "public policy." Women and men living on the landmass known as Canada, are not subject to any "public policies", mandates, or acts of legislation promoted by any commercial or municipal corporation for its officers and employees. All acts, Bills, and Statutes created only apply to "person." The definition of person in Black's Law Dictionary 5th Edition, page 1028, states; in general usage, a human being (ie:natural person) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words if I say a basket includes apples and oranges you will not find any other fruit in the basket. As plainly stated, anything that applies to person only applies to a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. The Crown is a for profit corporation, corporations by any name require contracts. Adhesion contracts are not contracts. Tacit contracts have been made without full disclosure. This requirement is expected within ____ days receipt of this Notice, with the documentation enclosed. The burden of proof falls upon the Claimant. Consider this an unalienable right and exercised dominion. Autograph ________________:______________________ All rights reserved

Subscribe thank You https://www.youtube.com/@constitutionalconventions6240 Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 Copy Right STRAWMAN & Live Birth to Become the Beneficiary Final Notice Proof of Claim and Consent to Contract Date_________________________ To: _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ and Hon. Minister of Finance, Katrine Conroy PO Box 9048 St. Prov. Govt. Victoria BC V8W 9E2 From: _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ This Final Notice is being sent with copies of the FOI; Freedom of Information and Access to Records, requiring proof of consent to contract, and any contracts pertaining to taxation, water use, land use, structures and buildings (under, on, or above the land), any and all animals and birds thereon, any and all chattles thereon, any and all by-laws said property is subject to et al. Notice to agent is notice to principal, notice to principal is notice to agent. This notice is formally served. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman. Contracts make the law and consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls upon the Claimant. The property noted above has no evidence of contracts or consents to contract set upon it. Therefore, no jurisdiction and obligation. Any acts of enforcement, threat, coercion, malice, or extortion, et al shall be deemed a trespass. Proof of claim falls upon the Claimant. Taxation and other infringements have been done through tacit agreement, perpetuated without disclosure of the facts that the corporations involved were operating under the color of law, de-facto, and ultra-vires. This is fraud, extortion, and conversion. Let it be known from this day on, there is no agreement or consent set upon this property without a contract.Contract makes the law and consent makes the contract. The burden of proof fell upon the Claimants noted herein. No response will be considered tacit agreement. This is an unalienable right and exercised dominion of Autograph _____________________:_____________________________ All rights reserved.

Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 Copy Right STRAWMAN & Live Birth to Become the Beneficiary WARNING-PRIVATE PROPERTY By Claim of Right of the PRIVATE OWNER AS OF THIS DAY : when FOI Req. is Rec'd NO TACIT CONSENT or CONTRACT to; Cariboo Regional District, any/all CROWN CORP., their Agents, Officers, Employees, Franchisees, or "Persons," et al. Those so TRESPASSING are subject to penalties VIOLATORS will be treated as INTRUDERS ANY official, agent or "person" entering without CONSENT or CONTRACT with the intent to trespass, extort, threaten, intimidate or otherwise commit malice to owner or property will be met with a penalty for said intrusion. Stated with Unalienable Right Exercised Dominion, and all Rights Reserved

Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 Copy Right STRAWMAN & Live Birth to Become the Beneficiary

Subscribe thank You https://www.youtube.com/@constitutionalconventions6240 Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 Copy Right STRAWMAN & Live Birth to Become the Beneficiary https://rumble.com/v4io1ze-copy-right-strawman-and-live-birth-to-become-the-beneficiary.html

Subscribe thank You https://www.youtube.com/@constitutionalconventions6240 Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 https://rumble.com/v4govwc-facts-vs-fiction-know-who-owns-the-land-not-canada-or-their-corrup-peice-of.html A beneficiary is a person (or entity) who is designated to receive the benefits of property owned by someone else. https://www.ontario.ca/page/get-or-replace-ontario-birth-certificate CIPO online \https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/canadian-intellectual-property-office/en Alberta Live Birth Cerificate https://formsmgmt.gov.ab.ca/Public/DVS11163B.xdp BC Live Birth Order certificates and copies https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/life-events/order-certificates-copies Canadian Intellectual Property Office https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/canadian-intellectual-property-office/en B PROOF OF CLAIM A beneficiary is a person (or entity) who is designated to receive the benefits of property owned by someone else. Rights Doc. 4 WE are all born with free will and unalienable rights. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law’ Consent makes the contract Adhesion contracts are not contracts because there was no consent, they are considered as gifts. We do not require any corporate created rights, such as the Charter of Rights and Freedom provided by the Government of Canada Corporation and/or ICCPR provided by the United Nations Corporation. If anyone claims to have jurisdiction over, you and/or requests payment request a copy of the contract. Government Corporations Government Services Corporations doing business as Government of Canada and/or the government of any provinces can only create rules (statutes) that only apply to their employees, franchisees, officers and dependents. Their rules (statutes) do not apply to the people in general. That is why the rules they create (statutes) are referred to as “public policy”. We do not require any corporate created rights, such as the Charter of Rights and Freedom provided by the Government of Canada Corporation and/or ICCPR provided by the United Nations Corporation. Women and men living in Canada are not subject to any Public Policies, mandates, or acts of legislation promoted by any commercial or municipal corporation for its officers and employees. We should not vote in private corporate shareholder elections sponsored by Canada Inc., Province of _____ Inc., or any other foreign corporation. All Acts, Bills and statutes created by the Government of Canada and/or any of the provincial governments only apply to “person”. The definition of person in Black’s Law Dictionary Fifth Edition on page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being ( i.e. natural person ) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words, if I say the basket includes apples and oranges you will not find any other type of fruit in the basket. As plainly stated in Black’s Law dictionary, anything that applies to person only applies to a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Does not apply to men or women! The Government of Canada and Government of all provinces are Crown for profit Corporations. The Prime Minister and/or the Premiers receive their orders from the shareholders of the Crown Corporation. They are the C.E.O.s/officers of the Crown Corporations. They carry out the orders that are relayed to them by the Governor General and/or the Lieutenant Governor. They (politicians) are in place to take the blame for the harm that is done to the people. They are replaced every four years with someone who claims that he/she is going to right the wrongs that were created, but nothing changes they carry out the orders provided by the shareholders as the previous C.E.O.s. Four years later they are blamed and replaced. PERSONS All Acts, Bills and statutes created by the Government of Canada and/or any of the provincial governments only apply to “person”. The definition of person in Black’s Law Dictionary Fifth Edition on page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being (i.e. natural person ) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words, if I say the basket includes apples and oranges you will not find any other type of fruit in the basket. As plainly stated in Black’s Law dictionary, anything that applies to person only applies to a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Does not apply to men or women _________________________________________________________ Name written in all capital letters The governing book of the English language is “The Oxford Styles Manual” which sometimes refers to “The Chicago Manual of Style” also The Oxford Manual of Style. All Uppercase text, all caps, or gloss is listed in the style's manuals under “foreign - language” , named ”Ancient-Latin” or Dog Latin. All Caps are not defined or recognized in meaning. All Caps is not English although you may think you are able to read it as English it is in fact, a calculated deception to be read separated from the rest of the “Document”. All Uppercase text has no lawful grammatical jurisdiction with common English and is a foreign language, headed under “Ancient-Latin”. (The Chicago Manual of Style, 16th Edition, 11:144-47). Glossa is two or more languages on a legal document. Glossa is a poisonous gloss which corrupts the essence of a text( Black’s Law Dictionary page 621 5th Edition) “Glossa” is also used to conceal or confuse the real facts in order to confuse, in order to gain tacit consent. A name written in all capital letters is written in dog Latin or is known as systemic text “a thing” created by the employees of the crown corporation, Therefore the Crown Corporation owns the creation. If you claim that the name written in all capital letters, is, you. You are admitting you are the property of the Crown Corporation (a slave). Cestui Que Vie Trust 's beneficiary is the name in all capital letters which is the property of the Crown Corporation, it is not you. All governments (corporations) and businesses such as banks and others that write your name in all capital letters are committing constructive fraud and conversion. (Engaged in criminal activity) ___________________________________________________ City, Municipality, Village et al Address Date TO: Mayor, CAO, CEO, Councillors et al FROM: The men and women living therein, The enclosed documentation: 1) Proof of Incorporation of the following entities; from Dunn & Bradstreet or EDGAR Search U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Note: the following are government services corporations’ (dba( "doing business as,") Government of Canada, EDGAR (CIK 0000230098) ; Government of British Columbia, EDGAR (CIK 0000836136) and (CIK 0000014306) ; Government of Alberta, EDGAR (CIK 0000810961) ; Government of Saskatchewan, EDGAR (CIK 0000203098) ; Government of Manitoba, EDGAR (CIK 0000826926) ; Ontario, EDGAR (CIK 0000074615) ; Quebec, EDGAR (0000722803) ; Province of New Brunswick, EDGAR (CIK 0000862406) ; Province of Nova Scotia, EDGAR (CIK 0000842639) 2) Copy of the Clearfield Doctrine; showing that corporations by ANY name DO NOT have the legal jurisdiction to taxation or law enforcement et al, without a consent to contract which is corporate policy when doing commerce. * Seek legal clarification and written proof to the contrary. This letter comes with the enclosed documents to ascertain the jurisdiction within our council, in which official positions are being held . Depending on the Oath, Declaration, or Covenant signed upon entering office, the positions may be operating under the "Color of Law," in a De-Facto, Un-lawful and thus ultra vires standing. This holds personal liability for anything signed on behalf of the people. There are 3 possible jurisdictions: A) Government Office: a PUBLIC OFFICE institution with full legal authority and jurisdiction to taxation, schools, infrastructure, peace keeping, hospital, courts, et al. as services, and needs of the local men and women therein. B) Having as the "Trustee" full fiduciary control of the "Trusts" set up to care for the local needs. De-jure/ lawful B) Non-Governmental Office, (NGO): a PRIVATE CORPORATE OFFICE, without the legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. This entity provides "Service Contracts," which requires contracts and consent to contract by those involved in the services. It's known as "Body Corporate," and serves "Incorporated Inhabitants." Did the men and women give consent to be incorporated? That's called FRAUD. Who is the "Head of Council" or "Global Mayor?" (“A created fiction” The Executive Control and Authority comes from the Corporation of the Province wherein we reside, and to which your office would receive the Acts, Statutes, Bylaws et al directly, through downloads from the corporation and are corporate policies not district policies. De-facto/ un-lawful/FRAUD C) Public/Private/Partnerships, (PPP): an International Entity one which downloads "FOREIGN," Corporate policies, UN/United Nations, WEF/ World Economic Forum, WHO/ World Health Organization et al. In this position there is also no legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. Consent to contract is a legal requirement to contract with the men and women. Did the men and women consent to Foreign Corporate Policies and occupation in the community without knowledge or consent? Are the United Nations Sustainable Goals/SDG's, Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 policies being implemented? Who has fiduciary control over the local Trusts as their Trustee? Who is the "Head of Council," and "Council of the Whole." “A fiction” De-Facto, un-lawful/FRAUD These are jurisdictional questions that are important to ascertain because through the stroke of a pen, a man or woman is being put into extreme personal liability for the agreements and infrastructures signed on to. Furthermore, there are 3 levels of Lawful/de-jure/jurisdictions LOCAL, PROVINCIAL, and FEDERAL - Each has their sphere of lawful jurisdiction and geographical area - Each has independent legislative, fiduciary, and judicial powers - NO level can legislate for the other jurisdiction NOR has the authority to operate beyond its purview We the people have come to ascertain for ourselves the jurisdiction WE are in because the last few years have shown us that something has gone horribly awry at the local level. We the people voted for positions of service to the local jurisdiction. Was there comprehension of the meaning of the oath, declaration or covenant sworn, upon taking office? Was time given to properly peruse any documents to sign and vote on? Many of these documents were written over many years, by legal firms and lawyers, whose signatures are not within the documents...whose are! They contain legalise, a language unto itself, and is the basis for how most FRAUD has occurred. Words like person, individual, inhabitant, resident, citizen, et al have a completely different meaning in these documents. FRAUD vitiates everything. We the people intend on restoring Peace, Order, and Lawful Governance should our suspicions prove correct. We require a response by ________________________________ and expect such from our elected officials. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law, and thus consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls upon the claimant. No response is considered tacit agreement. ______________________________________________________ Regional District of Address Date TO: Board Chair, CAO, CEO, Directors et al FROM: The enclosed documentation: 1) Proof of the Incorporation of the following entities, NOTE: government services corporations (dba:"doing business as,") EDGAR Search U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; Government of Canada, (CIK 0000230098) Government of British Columbia, (CIK 0000836136) and (CIK 0000014306) Government of Alberta, (CIK 0000810961) Government of Saskatchewan, (CIK 0000203098) Government of Manitoba, (CIK 0000826926) Ontario, (CIK 0000074615) Quebec, (CIK 0000722803) Province of New Brunswick, (CIK 0000862406) Province of Nova Scotia, (CIK 0000842639) 2) Copy of The CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE; showing that Corporations by ANY name DO NOT have the legal jurisdiction to Taxation or Law Enforcement et al without consent to contract by those involved in the transaction. Personal liability is then enforceable upon those acting illegally. The enclosed documents show that the Regional District through its Incorporation may be operating under the "Color of Law" and as such is de-facto, un-lawful, and ultra-vires. This information is not hear-say nor opinion, rather they state the facts of the matter, which are; ?- What Oath, Declaration, or Covenant was signed upon the commencement of the positions in council? These matter! ?- What jurisdiction is the office under? There are 3 possible Jurisdictions; 1) Government Office: a PUBLIC OFFICE institution, with lawful de-jure status as a holder of the "PUBLIC TRUST", Trustee with Fiduciary control, and thus legal authority to the taxation of the men and women within a geographical area, and is one of "service" to the local needs; school, hospital, peace keeping, infrastructure, courts, et al. 2) Non-Governmental Office (NGO): a PRIVATE CORPORATE OFFICE, that provides "Service Contracts," and is known as a "Body Corporate" to "Incorporated Inhabitants." This jurisdiction requires Consent to Contract, is de-facto, un-lawful and as such has NO legal jurisdiction to taxation. The Executive Control and Authority comes from the corporation of the province wherein the office is located. The Acts, Statutes, Bylaws et al are downloaded to the district and are corporate policies. 3) Public/Private/Partnerships (PPP) : an INTERNATIONAL ENTITY, receiving downloads from a "FOREIGN" Corporation; United Nations, WHO/World Health Organization, WEF/World Economic Forum et al. This is also a de-facto, un-lawful jurisdiction with NO legal grounds to the taxation of men and women, and also requires Consent to Contract. NOTE: In British Columbia, as an example, The BC Assessment Authority is a CROWN Corporation, created in 1974 by the Corporation of British Columbia Inc., "in order to earn profit for the Government of British Columbia Inc., without jurisdiction nor contracts with the men and women of BC. NOTE: There are 3 levels of lawful, de-jure governance Local, Provincial and Federal - Each has their sphere of jurisdiction and geographical area - Each has independent legislative, fiduciary, and judicial powers - NO level can legislate for the other jurisdiction NOR has the authority to operate beyond its purview These 2 questions are the most important because the answer to them will establish the personal liability through the signature/autograph put upon the documents requiring a vote. Was there full comprehension of the Oath, Declaration, or Covenant signed when entering office as a Director? Was there time to peruse any documents requiring a vote? Most often these documents are many pages long and were made over many years, by legal firms and lawyers whose signatures are NOT contained therein. Whose is? Making that signature "personally" liable for the decisions made Was there full comprehension of the difference between the legal wording contained therein, and the knowledge of their meanings? Such as person, individual, constituent, citizen,et al. "Legalese" is a language unto itself and is the basis for most FRAUD, which in law vitiates everything. The men and women in our Regional District Office were empowered by the men and women, to operate under, and in a jurisdiction that is de-jure, lawful, and with a fiduciary trust, to serve the men and women of our geographical area and no other. To ensure that the needs of the local men, women, and their property were the priority and responsibility of the Regional District. So...What Office is held? Lawfully/de-jure or unlawfully and de-facto? We require an answer, on or before __________________ No answer will be considered a tacit agreement. The office of the Regional District is held by the trust of the members of our community, the neighbours and friends who voted for positions in an office to serve the community. That's why we require proof of what oath, declaration, or covenant was given. The men and women of __________________ _________________________________________________________ Notice of Demand and Trespass Proof of Jurisdiction and Contract Proof of Claim It has come to our attention, the concerned men and women, that our Educational Institutions, whose service to us is the education of our sons and daughters (hereafter named as our "property") has implemented the SOGI 123 Program without a consent to contract. HISTORY; this program began in 2007 through the ARC Foundation. A private foundation based in Vancouver, British Columbia Inc. Other corporations involved in the funding are; British Columbia Ministry of Education Inc.; British Columbia Teachers Federation Inc.; University of British Columbia Inc., and through private donations( gifts from registered charities also corporations), and the corporation of Canada Inc. Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Documents included herein: - Proof of the incorporation of Government of Canada Inc., Government of British Columbia Inc. - Copy of the "CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE", a 1942 court case, accepted worldwide because it's corporate, commerce law. Clearly stating the requirement of contracts Governments lose their sovereignty when they become corporations, thus no different than Canadian Tire using Canadian Tire money. - Copy of the definition of "GLOSSA", pertinent in this matter because it's a matter of concealment, meant to confuse using "text" to corrupt the real facts in order to gain tacit consent. There's no statute of limitation on fraud. - Our Mayoral, Councillor, and Regional Districts are also incorporated through the removal of many of the municipal powers in 2004 with the Local Government Act incorporated into the Community Charter, prior to this; the local mayor had full de-jure and lawful jurisdiction, in relation to our schools. - Copy of the definition of the All Capital Identity, created with the "Birth Certificate," a fiction, constructive fraud and conversion. - Copy of the 10 Points of Contract Law, made simple for comprehension on this matter. - Copy of the 12 Presumptions of Court. Included for the comprehension of status. Fundamentally, the fraud upon our property when born, vitiates any Board jurisdiction to the ownership of our property. We, the men and women who created them, own them. "He who creates owns!" A maxim in law Therefore, it is incumbent upon those who have positions on the Board to cease and desist the SOGI 123 Program which is an infringement upon the property known as our sons and daughters. Failure to do so as corporate entities, through Contract Law, we intend on exercising our jurisdiction, as is our right, to the fullest extent upon the men and women personally sitting on the Board. We strongly suggest a consultation with a lawyer, who by the way wrote this mess. "Praetextu legis injusta agens duplo puniendus" We the People DO NOT require legal Re-presentation in this matter because we're well aware of the 12 Presumptions of Court. I doubt any lawyer will be willing to assist the men and women on the Board, regardless of the facts, because through their: legalize they do deceive. Be it therefore noted, with the documents contained herein, that our claim of proof of contract and the jurisdictional fraud, put against us and our property is considered a trespass. It is the duty of men and women to discuss these delicate matters with our property within our own jurisdiction. We are not against the health and wellbeing of another's property, within their jurisdiction, rather not in the educational setting. We the People, regarding our property in the care of the educational system, again, reiterate, and declare that the burden of proof falls on the claimant. Consider the response with wisdom and discernment since we voted men and women into what we thought was a Educational Office not a Corporate Office. We require no more than 7 days for implementing the redressing of the trespass against our property, with the immediate removal of any and all literature, electronic or written, devices, toys (we use the word with baited breath) et al in relation to the SOGI 123 PROGRAM post haste. For it was through corporate policies, without contractual consent, that the trespass has been made against our property thus creating this claim against those men and women on the Board personally. Furthermore, do not be deceived into thinking that the registration of our property into the corporation rather than an educational institution voids any responsibility on the part of the men and women on the Board, as it was done in fraud. Again we'll state that fraud vitiates everything. In all fairness to the men and women on the Board, our neighbours, not the corporations involved, perhaps unaware of the situation mentioned above and the personal liability for this trespass, We the People will support the men and women in this matter of remedy, because we trusted that their service, while sitting on the Board, was to serve our property with a lawful education. No response will be considered a tacit agreement. Sincerely and without prejudice or malice We the People Autograph_______________________:________ __________________________________________________________ Statement of Claim Taxation Between the Corporation of ______________________________________ And the noted particulars on the documents included herein. The above corporation has not proved jurisdiction, consent to contract, nor provide proof of a contract to claim the monies expected in taxation, hence tacit agreement to this claim. Who claims this debt be true, who claims this debt to due? Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Three requirements were made in writing to the Corporations Finance Minister to provide said proof, and are included in this document. Furthermore, copies of the Clearfield Doctrine, EDGAR # for the Corporation involved, Regina-v-John Anthony Hill 12 May, 2011 at Southwark Crown Court, Case # T20107746, (the Queen declared, "Lawfully NOT valid Monarch, hence Charles the III too),and "Glossa," (see Black's Law) corrupts the essence of the text presented on your documents. This refusal of consent to contract extends from this day forward, as noted with receipt of this document, until such a date in the future when there is a de-jure government upon the landmass commonly known worldwide as Canada, British Columbia, et al. Autograph _________________________:___________________________ Dated this day _______________________________________________________ Proof of Claim Re: Property Tax; Contract and Proof of Consent to Contract Between the Corporation of ___________________________________________________ and _____________________________________________________________________________ Regarding the property registered as; ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ It is required and incumbent upon the Corporations Minister of Finance, to provide proof of jurisdiction as a corporation, to taxation without full disclosure of the facts, and consent to contract, as per contract law. See: The Clearfield Doctrine; Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. 363 Syllabus CLEARFIELD TRUST CO. et al. v. UNITED STATES CERTIORARI to the CIRCUIT COURT of APPEALS for the THIRD CIRCUIT No. 490 Argued February 5, 1943 Decided March 1, 1943(and accepted worldwide when conducting commerce) Further to the above noted court case, this requirement will be expected within 7 days receipt of this claim for proof of the jurisdictional obligation by the corporation to taxation to the property noted herein. Who claims this debt be true, who claims this debt be due? Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Property Taxes have been paid previously without consent to contract, due to the fraud perpetrated without full disclosure of the fact that the corporation mentioned herein, was not a lawful government with the de-jure jurisdiction to taxation, thus Ultra-Vires. Rather, a corporation whose name included the words "government," which is fraud based on Black's Law Dictionary, any edition. No response will be confirmation of a tacit agreement to the above. Thanking you in advance, Autograph: _________________________:_____________________________ Dated this day: ______________________________________ ______________________________________________________ STATEMENT of CLAIM Date:_____________________ STATE of TITLE CERTIFICATE: Certificate number________________________________________ Land Title Office__________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ Title Number______________________________________________ Registered Owner__________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Taxation Authority__________________________________________ Description of Land__________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Charges, Liens and Interests_____________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ Proof of contract is required to provide evidence of any claim made upon the aforementioned property; taxation; land use; water use; structures and buildings above, on, or below the land; any and all animals thereon; any and all chattles upon said land; et al, provide proof of any contractual obligation having been made with respect to said land. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law, and thus consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. (See: Regina-v-John Anthony Hill 12 May, 2011 at Southwark Crown Court, Case # T20107746, in which the Queen was declared to be a "Lawfully NOT Valid Monarch." Hence, neither is Charles the III) (See: Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. 363, Syllabus. Clearfield trust Co.et al. v. United States, Certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.No. 490. Argued February 5, 1943 Decided March 1, 1943 ; and accepted worldwide when conducting commerce) The requirement to provide Proof of Contract within this Statement of Claim, is expected within ____________days from receipt of the documentation herein. No response will be considered a tacit agreement to the above. Autograph_________________________:_______________________ :GLOSSA: ~ The 'Born-Date' Vs. the 'Registration-Date' Does your Birth Certificate identify YOU as TWO people, not one? (You is plural, one and another) Have you ever wondered why your SURNAME is written using the ALL UPPERCASE TEXT? Put simply, 'you' are using a ‘Legal’ name and this is fraud. See the ‘name’ is actually split up into separate entities – The Christian-name and The ‘Surname’. You register these names to the Crown Corporation LTD. as their Property by your Birth Certificate which is given a bond number. Your physical value is used as collateral for these bonds allowing the United Kingdom LTD. to take out loans from private Banks, such as 'Bank of England' and profit is made by way of legal fines (Acts & Statutes), bills and taxation. – Hence money is no longer backed by Gold or Silver, but by our physical value or man power. The UNITED KINGDOM LTD is a privately owned Corporation-ship. And corporations are considered ‘ships’ and they are governed under the law of the sea, known as Maritime Law. There is no real 'ship' but a 'document-vessel' – which in our case was our Birth Certificate Created by the Doctor when s/he ‘docked’ you. TAKE NOTICE Whenever you encounter the Legal Document (document-vessel) you will notice that your surname (or sometimes all of your names) will be written using the ALL-UPPERCASE TEXT. This is no coincidence - the ALL UPPERCASE text is not defined or recognized in The Oxford Styles Manual, (the governing book of the English language) – meaning that although you may be able to read it as English, it is in fact, NOT English. The all CAPS or Gloss can be found within the 'Oxford Styles Manual', under 'foreign-languages', named 'Ancient-Latin' The main place this ALL-UPPERCASE text is found to be defined as a language, is when American Sign Language (ASL), a signing language used for the deaf, is written. ASL can be defined in the book ‘The Chicago Manual of Style’ under the foreign-languages header: American Sign Language (ASL) compound signs, 10.152 and ‘glosses, 10.147’. Thus, defining this text as a foreign language Further going on to say that when written, it has no 1-to-1 correspondence with any other languages on the document. The all CAPS or Gloss is also found in the 'Oxford Styles Manual', under foreign-languages, 'Ancient-Latin', however as the all caps UK LTD is registered in [Washington D.C[, they seem to be using the 'Chicago Manual of Style' , not the Oxford. Putting two or more languages onto a legal document is known in law as a ‘Glossa’. Black's Law Dictionary defines: 'GLOSSA' - “It is a poisonous gloss which corrupts the essence of the text”. Meaning that by using a Glossa in a document they are trying to conceal or confuse the real facts. If you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL-UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL if you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALLf you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So, you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL-UPPER CASE. If you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL-UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So, you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL Soon you will realize that virtually all court orders, speeding tickets and most other legal documents actually make no sense whatsoever. They only make sense when we make the assumption that it is all plain English and we read it as one, once you take one away from the other – it renders the document useless. Seeing as the ‘government’ is simply a privately owned Corporation, it can only impose fines and acts upon other corporations. And by tricking us to registering our names as a corporate entity and then tricking us into thinking these names are physically us, it manages to get us to represent the corporately registered name and therefore bear the burden of fines and policies. This is a crime known as “personage”. Hand in hand with “personage” comes a crime known as “barratry” which is knowingly bringing false claims into court- This is what police, politicians, judges are doing daily. The Birth-Certificate, Two-Names, Two-Dates and Two-Languages? Capitis Diminutio Maxima (Name in ALL CAPITALS) For the purposes of understanding one's legal or commercial status under the Admiralty system (the law system used in England, Canada and much of the US), it is necessary to examine the curious use of all CAPS -Capitis Diminutio Maxima- in legal and domestic income tax forms, credit cards & statements, loans, mortgages, speeding & parking tickets, car documents, road tax, court summons etc. While seemingly a trite concern, this apparently small detail has extremely deep significance for all of us! Gage Canadian Dictionary 1983 Sec. 4 defines Capitalize adj. as "To take advantage of - To use to one's own advantage." Black's Law Dictionary – Revised 4th Edition 1968, provides a more comprehensive definition as follows … Capitis Diminutio (meaning the diminishing of status through the use of capitalization)- In Roman law. A diminishing or abridgment of personality; a loss or curtailment of a man's status or aggregate of leg al attributes and qualifications.

Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 https://rumble.com/v4govwc-facts-vs-fiction-know-who-owns-the-land-not-canada-or-their-corrup-peice-of.html A beneficiary is a person (or entity) who is designated to receive the benefits of property owned by someone else. https://www.ontario.ca/page/get-or-replace-ontario-birth-certificate CIPO online \https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/canadian-intellectual-property-office/en Alberta Live Birth Cerificate https://formsmgmt.gov.ab.ca/Public/DVS11163B.xdp BC Live Birth Order certificates and copies https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/life-events/order-certificates-copies Canadian Intellectual Property Office https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/canadian-intellectual-property-office/en B PROOF OF CLAIM A beneficiary is a person (or entity) who is designated to receive the benefits of property owned by someone else. Rights Doc. 4 WE are all born with free will and unalienable rights. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law’ Consent makes the contract Adhesion contracts are not contracts because there was no consent, they are considered as gifts. We do not require any corporate created rights, such as the Charter of Rights and Freedom provided by the Government of Canada Corporation and/or ICCPR provided by the United Nations Corporation. If anyone claims to have jurisdiction over, you and/or requests payment request a copy of the contract. Government Corporations Government Services Corporations doing business as Government of Canada and/or the government of any provinces can only create rules (statutes) that only apply to their employees, franchisees, officers and dependents. Their rules (statutes) do not apply to the people in general. That is why the rules they create (statutes) are referred to as “public policy”. We do not require any corporate created rights, such as the Charter of Rights and Freedom provided by the Government of Canada Corporation and/or ICCPR provided by the United Nations Corporation. Women and men living in Canada are not subject to any Public Policies, mandates, or acts of legislation promoted by any commercial or municipal corporation for its officers and employees. We should not vote in private corporate shareholder elections sponsored by Canada Inc., Province of _____ Inc., or any other foreign corporation. All Acts, Bills and statutes created by the Government of Canada and/or any of the provincial governments only apply to “person”. The definition of person in Black’s Law Dictionary Fifth Edition on page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being ( i.e. natural person ) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words, if I say the basket includes apples and oranges you will not find any other type of fruit in the basket. As plainly stated in Black’s Law dictionary, anything that applies to person only applies to a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Does not apply to men or women! The Government of Canada and Government of all provinces are Crown for profit Corporations. The Prime Minister and/or the Premiers receive their orders from the shareholders of the Crown Corporation. They are the C.E.O.s/officers of the Crown Corporations. They carry out the orders that are relayed to them by the Governor General and/or the Lieutenant Governor. They (politicians) are in place to take the blame for the harm that is done to the people. They are replaced every four years with someone who claims that he/she is going to right the wrongs that were created, but nothing changes they carry out the orders provided by the shareholders as the previous C.E.O.s. Four years later they are blamed and replaced. PERSONS All Acts, Bills and statutes created by the Government of Canada and/or any of the provincial governments only apply to “person”. The definition of person in Black’s Law Dictionary Fifth Edition on page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being (i.e. natural person ) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words, if I say the basket includes apples and oranges you will not find any other type of fruit in the basket. As plainly stated in Black’s Law dictionary, anything that applies to person only applies to a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Does not apply to men or women _________________________________________________________ Name written in all capital letters The governing book of the English language is “The Oxford Styles Manual” which sometimes refers to “The Chicago Manual of Style” also The Oxford Manual of Style. All Uppercase text, all caps, or gloss is listed in the style's manuals under “foreign - language” , named ”Ancient-Latin” or Dog Latin. All Caps are not defined or recognized in meaning. All Caps is not English although you may think you are able to read it as English it is in fact, a calculated deception to be read separated from the rest of the “Document”. All Uppercase text has no lawful grammatical jurisdiction with common English and is a foreign language, headed under “Ancient-Latin”. (The Chicago Manual of Style, 16th Edition, 11:144-47). Glossa is two or more languages on a legal document. Glossa is a poisonous gloss which corrupts the essence of a text( Black’s Law Dictionary page 621 5th Edition) “Glossa” is also used to conceal or confuse the real facts in order to confuse, in order to gain tacit consent. A name written in all capital letters is written in dog Latin or is known as systemic text “a thing” created by the employees of the crown corporation, Therefore the Crown Corporation owns the creation. If you claim that the name written in all capital letters, is, you. You are admitting you are the property of the Crown Corporation (a slave). Cestui Que Vie Trust 's beneficiary is the name in all capital letters which is the property of the Crown Corporation, it is not you. All governments (corporations) and businesses such as banks and others that write your name in all capital letters are committing constructive fraud and conversion. (Engaged in criminal activity) ___________________________________________________ City, Municipality, Village et al Address Date TO: Mayor, CAO, CEO, Councillors et al FROM: The men and women living therein, The enclosed documentation: 1) Proof of Incorporation of the following entities; from Dunn & Bradstreet or EDGAR Search U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Note: the following are government services corporations’ (dba( "doing business as,") Government of Canada, EDGAR (CIK 0000230098) ; Government of British Columbia, EDGAR (CIK 0000836136) and (CIK 0000014306) ; Government of Alberta, EDGAR (CIK 0000810961) ; Government of Saskatchewan, EDGAR (CIK 0000203098) ; Government of Manitoba, EDGAR (CIK 0000826926) ; Ontario, EDGAR (CIK 0000074615) ; Quebec, EDGAR (0000722803) ; Province of New Brunswick, EDGAR (CIK 0000862406) ; Province of Nova Scotia, EDGAR (CIK 0000842639) 2) Copy of the Clearfield Doctrine; showing that corporations by ANY name DO NOT have the legal jurisdiction to taxation or law enforcement et al, without a consent to contract which is corporate policy when doing commerce. * Seek legal clarification and written proof to the contrary. This letter comes with the enclosed documents to ascertain the jurisdiction within our council, in which official positions are being held . Depending on the Oath, Declaration, or Covenant signed upon entering office, the positions may be operating under the "Color of Law," in a De-Facto, Un-lawful and thus ultra vires standing. This holds personal liability for anything signed on behalf of the people. There are 3 possible jurisdictions: A) Government Office: a PUBLIC OFFICE institution with full legal authority and jurisdiction to taxation, schools, infrastructure, peace keeping, hospital, courts, et al. as services, and needs of the local men and women therein. B) Having as the "Trustee" full fiduciary control of the "Trusts" set up to care for the local needs. De-jure/ lawful B) Non-Governmental Office, (NGO): a PRIVATE CORPORATE OFFICE, without the legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. This entity provides "Service Contracts," which requires contracts and consent to contract by those involved in the services. It's known as "Body Corporate," and serves "Incorporated Inhabitants." Did the men and women give consent to be incorporated? That's called FRAUD. Who is the "Head of Council" or "Global Mayor?" (“A created fiction” The Executive Control and Authority comes from the Corporation of the Province wherein we reside, and to which your office would receive the Acts, Statutes, Bylaws et al directly, through downloads from the corporation and are corporate policies not district policies. De-facto/ un-lawful/FRAUD C) Public/Private/Partnerships, (PPP): an International Entity one which downloads "FOREIGN," Corporate policies, UN/United Nations, WEF/ World Economic Forum, WHO/ World Health Organization et al. In this position there is also no legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. Consent to contract is a legal requirement to contract with the men and women. Did the men and women consent to Foreign Corporate Policies and occupation in the community without knowledge or consent? Are the United Nations Sustainable Goals/SDG's, Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 policies being implemented? Who has fiduciary control over the local Trusts as their Trustee? Who is the "Head of Council," and "Council of the Whole." “A fiction” De-Facto, un-lawful/FRAUD These are jurisdictional questions that are important to ascertain because through the stroke of a pen, a man or woman is being put into extreme personal liability for the agreements and infrastructures signed on to. Furthermore, there are 3 levels of Lawful/de-jure/jurisdictions LOCAL, PROVINCIAL, and FEDERAL - Each has their sphere of lawful jurisdiction and geographical area - Each has independent legislative, fiduciary, and judicial powers - NO level can legislate for the other jurisdiction NOR has the authority to operate beyond its purview We the people have come to ascertain for ourselves the jurisdiction WE are in because the last few years have shown us that something has gone horribly awry at the local level. We the people voted for positions of service to the local jurisdiction. Was there comprehension of the meaning of the oath, declaration or covenant sworn, upon taking office? Was time given to properly peruse any documents to sign and vote on? Many of these documents were written over many years, by legal firms and lawyers, whose signatures are not within the documents...whose are! They contain legalise, a language unto itself, and is the basis for how most FRAUD has occurred. Words like person, individual, inhabitant, resident, citizen, et al have a completely different meaning in these documents. FRAUD vitiates everything. We the people intend on restoring Peace, Order, and Lawful Governance should our suspicions prove correct. We require a response by ________________________________ and expect such from our elected officials. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law, and thus consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls upon the claimant. No response is considered tacit agreement. ______________________________________________________ Regional District of Address Date TO: Board Chair, CAO, CEO, Directors et al FROM: The enclosed documentation: 1) Proof of the Incorporation of the following entities, NOTE: government services corporations (dba:"doing business as,") EDGAR Search U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; Government of Canada, (CIK 0000230098) Government of British Columbia, (CIK 0000836136) and (CIK 0000014306) Government of Alberta, (CIK 0000810961) Government of Saskatchewan, (CIK 0000203098) Government of Manitoba, (CIK 0000826926) Ontario, (CIK 0000074615) Quebec, (CIK 0000722803) Province of New Brunswick, (CIK 0000862406) Province of Nova Scotia, (CIK 0000842639) 2) Copy of The CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE; showing that Corporations by ANY name DO NOT have the legal jurisdiction to Taxation or Law Enforcement et al without consent to contract by those involved in the transaction. Personal liability is then enforceable upon those acting illegally. The enclosed documents show that the Regional District through its Incorporation may be operating under the "Color of Law" and as such is de-facto, un-lawful, and ultra-vires. This information is not hear-say nor opinion, rather they state the facts of the matter, which are; ?- What Oath, Declaration, or Covenant was signed upon the commencement of the positions in council? These matter! ?- What jurisdiction is the office under? There are 3 possible Jurisdictions; 1) Government Office: a PUBLIC OFFICE institution, with lawful de-jure status as a holder of the "PUBLIC TRUST", Trustee with Fiduciary control, and thus legal authority to the taxation of the men and women within a geographical area, and is one of "service" to the local needs; school, hospital, peace keeping, infrastructure, courts, et al. 2) Non-Governmental Office (NGO): a PRIVATE CORPORATE OFFICE, that provides "Service Contracts," and is known as a "Body Corporate" to "Incorporated Inhabitants." This jurisdiction requires Consent to Contract, is de-facto, un-lawful and as such has NO legal jurisdiction to taxation. The Executive Control and Authority comes from the corporation of the province wherein the office is located. The Acts, Statutes, Bylaws et al are downloaded to the district and are corporate policies. 3) Public/Private/Partnerships (PPP) : an INTERNATIONAL ENTITY, receiving downloads from a "FOREIGN" Corporation; United Nations, WHO/World Health Organization, WEF/World Economic Forum et al. This is also a de-facto, un-lawful jurisdiction with NO legal grounds to the taxation of men and women, and also requires Consent to Contract. NOTE: In British Columbia, as an example, The BC Assessment Authority is a CROWN Corporation, created in 1974 by the Corporation of British Columbia Inc., "in order to earn profit for the Government of British Columbia Inc., without jurisdiction nor contracts with the men and women of BC. NOTE: There are 3 levels of lawful, de-jure governance Local, Provincial and Federal - Each has their sphere of jurisdiction and geographical area - Each has independent legislative, fiduciary, and judicial powers - NO level can legislate for the other jurisdiction NOR has the authority to operate beyond its purview These 2 questions are the most important because the answer to them will establish the personal liability through the signature/autograph put upon the documents requiring a vote. Was there full comprehension of the Oath, Declaration, or Covenant signed when entering office as a Director? Was there time to peruse any documents requiring a vote? Most often these documents are many pages long and were made over many years, by legal firms and lawyers whose signatures are NOT contained therein. Whose is? Making that signature "personally" liable for the decisions made Was there full comprehension of the difference between the legal wording contained therein, and the knowledge of their meanings? Such as person, individual, constituent, citizen,et al. "Legalese" is a language unto itself and is the basis for most FRAUD, which in law vitiates everything. The men and women in our Regional District Office were empowered by the men and women, to operate under, and in a jurisdiction that is de-jure, lawful, and with a fiduciary trust, to serve the men and women of our geographical area and no other. To ensure that the needs of the local men, women, and their property were the priority and responsibility of the Regional District. So...What Office is held? Lawfully/de-jure or unlawfully and de-facto? We require an answer, on or before __________________ No answer will be considered a tacit agreement. The office of the Regional District is held by the trust of the members of our community, the neighbours and friends who voted for positions in an office to serve the community. That's why we require proof of what oath, declaration, or covenant was given. The men and women of __________________ _________________________________________________________ Notice of Demand and Trespass Proof of Jurisdiction and Contract Proof of Claim It has come to our attention, the concerned men and women, that our Educational Institutions, whose service to us is the education of our sons and daughters (hereafter named as our "property") has implemented the SOGI 123 Program without a consent to contract. HISTORY; this program began in 2007 through the ARC Foundation. A private foundation based in Vancouver, British Columbia Inc. Other corporations involved in the funding are; British Columbia Ministry of Education Inc.; British Columbia Teachers Federation Inc.; University of British Columbia Inc., and through private donations( gifts from registered charities also corporations), and the corporation of Canada Inc. Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Documents included herein: - Proof of the incorporation of Government of Canada Inc., Government of British Columbia Inc. - Copy of the "CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE", a 1942 court case, accepted worldwide because it's corporate, commerce law. Clearly stating the requirement of contracts Governments lose their sovereignty when they become corporations, thus no different than Canadian Tire using Canadian Tire money. - Copy of the definition of "GLOSSA", pertinent in this matter because it's a matter of concealment, meant to confuse using "text" to corrupt the real facts in order to gain tacit consent. There's no statute of limitation on fraud. - Our Mayoral, Councillor, and Regional Districts are also incorporated through the removal of many of the municipal powers in 2004 with the Local Government Act incorporated into the Community Charter, prior to this; the local mayor had full de-jure and lawful jurisdiction, in relation to our schools. - Copy of the definition of the All Capital Identity, created with the "Birth Certificate," a fiction, constructive fraud and conversion. - Copy of the 10 Points of Contract Law, made simple for comprehension on this matter. - Copy of the 12 Presumptions of Court. Included for the comprehension of status. Fundamentally, the fraud upon our property when born, vitiates any Board jurisdiction to the ownership of our property. We, the men and women who created them, own them. "He who creates owns!" A maxim in law Therefore, it is incumbent upon those who have positions on the Board to cease and desist the SOGI 123 Program which is an infringement upon the property known as our sons and daughters. Failure to do so as corporate entities, through Contract Law, we intend on exercising our jurisdiction, as is our right, to the fullest extent upon the men and women personally sitting on the Board. We strongly suggest a consultation with a lawyer, who by the way wrote this mess. "Praetextu legis injusta agens duplo puniendus" We the People DO NOT require legal Re-presentation in this matter because we're well aware of the 12 Presumptions of Court. I doubt any lawyer will be willing to assist the men and women on the Board, regardless of the facts, because through their: legalize they do deceive. Be it therefore noted, with the documents contained herein, that our claim of proof of contract and the jurisdictional fraud, put against us and our property is considered a trespass. It is the duty of men and women to discuss these delicate matters with our property within our own jurisdiction. We are not against the health and wellbeing of another's property, within their jurisdiction, rather not in the educational setting. We the People, regarding our property in the care of the educational system, again, reiterate, and declare that the burden of proof falls on the claimant. Consider the response with wisdom and discernment since we voted men and women into what we thought was a Educational Office not a Corporate Office. We require no more than 7 days for implementing the redressing of the trespass against our property, with the immediate removal of any and all literature, electronic or written, devices, toys (we use the word with baited breath) et al in relation to the SOGI 123 PROGRAM post haste. For it was through corporate policies, without contractual consent, that the trespass has been made against our property thus creating this claim against those men and women on the Board personally. Furthermore, do not be deceived into thinking that the registration of our property into the corporation rather than an educational institution voids any responsibility on the part of the men and women on the Board, as it was done in fraud. Again we'll state that fraud vitiates everything. In all fairness to the men and women on the Board, our neighbours, not the corporations involved, perhaps unaware of the situation mentioned above and the personal liability for this trespass, We the People will support the men and women in this matter of remedy, because we trusted that their service, while sitting on the Board, was to serve our property with a lawful education. No response will be considered a tacit agreement. Sincerely and without prejudice or malice We the People Autograph_______________________:________ __________________________________________________________ Statement of Claim Taxation Between the Corporation of ______________________________________ And the noted particulars on the documents included herein. The above corporation has not proved jurisdiction, consent to contract, nor provide proof of a contract to claim the monies expected in taxation, hence tacit agreement to this claim. Who claims this debt be true, who claims this debt to due? Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Three requirements were made in writing to the Corporations Finance Minister to provide said proof, and are included in this document. Furthermore, copies of the Clearfield Doctrine, EDGAR # for the Corporation involved, Regina-v-John Anthony Hill 12 May, 2011 at Southwark Crown Court, Case # T20107746, (the Queen declared, "Lawfully NOT valid Monarch, hence Charles the III too),and "Glossa," (see Black's Law) corrupts the essence of the text presented on your documents. This refusal of consent to contract extends from this day forward, as noted with receipt of this document, until such a date in the future when there is a de-jure government upon the landmass commonly known worldwide as Canada, British Columbia, et al. Autograph _________________________:___________________________ Dated this day _______________________________________________________ Proof of Claim Re: Property Tax; Contract and Proof of Consent to Contract Between the Corporation of ___________________________________________________ and _____________________________________________________________________________ Regarding the property registered as; ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ It is required and incumbent upon the Corporations Minister of Finance, to provide proof of jurisdiction as a corporation, to taxation without full disclosure of the facts, and consent to contract, as per contract law. See: The Clearfield Doctrine; Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. 363 Syllabus CLEARFIELD TRUST CO. et al. v. UNITED STATES CERTIORARI to the CIRCUIT COURT of APPEALS for the THIRD CIRCUIT No. 490 Argued February 5, 1943 Decided March 1, 1943(and accepted worldwide when conducting commerce) Further to the above noted court case, this requirement will be expected within 7 days receipt of this claim for proof of the jurisdictional obligation by the corporation to taxation to the property noted herein. Who claims this debt be true, who claims this debt be due? Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Property Taxes have been paid previously without consent to contract, due to the fraud perpetrated without full disclosure of the fact that the corporation mentioned herein, was not a lawful government with the de-jure jurisdiction to taxation, thus Ultra-Vires. Rather, a corporation whose name included the words "government," which is fraud based on Black's Law Dictionary, any edition. No response will be confirmation of a tacit agreement to the above. Thanking you in advance, Autograph: _________________________:_____________________________ Dated this day: ______________________________________ ______________________________________________________ STATEMENT of CLAIM Date:_____________________ STATE of TITLE CERTIFICATE: Certificate number________________________________________ Land Title Office__________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ Title Number______________________________________________ Registered Owner__________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Taxation Authority__________________________________________ Description of Land__________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Charges, Liens and Interests_____________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ Proof of contract is required to provide evidence of any claim made upon the aforementioned property; taxation; land use; water use; structures and buildings above, on, or below the land; any and all animals thereon; any and all chattles upon said land; et al, provide proof of any contractual obligation having been made with respect to said land. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law, and thus consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. (See: Regina-v-John Anthony Hill 12 May, 2011 at Southwark Crown Court, Case # T20107746, in which the Queen was declared to be a "Lawfully NOT Valid Monarch." Hence, neither is Charles the III) (See: Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. 363, Syllabus. Clearfield trust Co.et al. v. United States, Certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.No. 490. Argued February 5, 1943 Decided March 1, 1943 ; and accepted worldwide when conducting commerce) The requirement to provide Proof of Contract within this Statement of Claim, is expected within ____________days from receipt of the documentation herein. No response will be considered a tacit agreement to the above. Autograph_________________________:_______________________ :GLOSSA: ~ The 'Born-Date' Vs. the 'Registration-Date' Does your Birth Certificate identify YOU as TWO people, not one? (You is plural, one and another) Have you ever wondered why your SURNAME is written using the ALL UPPERCASE TEXT? Put simply, 'you' are using a ‘Legal’ name and this is fraud. See the ‘name’ is actually split up into separate entities – The Christian-name and The ‘Surname’. You register these names to the Crown Corporation LTD. as their Property by your Birth Certificate which is given a bond number. Your physical value is used as collateral for these bonds allowing the United Kingdom LTD. to take out loans from private Banks, such as 'Bank of England' and profit is made by way of legal fines (Acts & Statutes), bills and taxation. – Hence money is no longer backed by Gold or Silver, but by our physical value or man power. The UNITED KINGDOM LTD is a privately owned Corporation-ship. And corporations are considered ‘ships’ and they are governed under the law of the sea, known as Maritime Law. There is no real 'ship' but a 'document-vessel' – which in our case was our Birth Certificate Created by the Doctor when s/he ‘docked’ you. TAKE NOTICE Whenever you encounter the Legal Document (document-vessel) you will notice that your surname (or sometimes all of your names) will be written using the ALL-UPPERCASE TEXT. This is no coincidence - the ALL UPPERCASE text is not defined or recognized in The Oxford Styles Manual, (the governing book of the English language) – meaning that although you may be able to read it as English, it is in fact, NOT English. The all CAPS or Gloss can be found within the 'Oxford Styles Manual', under 'foreign-languages', named 'Ancient-Latin' The main place this ALL-UPPERCASE text is found to be defined as a language, is when American Sign Language (ASL), a signing language used for the deaf, is written. ASL can be defined in the book ‘The Chicago Manual of Style’ under the foreign-languages header: American Sign Language (ASL) compound signs, 10.152 and ‘glosses, 10.147’. Thus, defining this text as a foreign language Further going on to say that when written, it has no 1-to-1 correspondence with any other languages on the document. The all CAPS or Gloss is also found in the 'Oxford Styles Manual', under foreign-languages, 'Ancient-Latin', however as the all caps UK LTD is registered in [Washington D.C[, they seem to be using the 'Chicago Manual of Style' , not the Oxford. Putting two or more languages onto a legal document is known in law as a ‘Glossa’. Black's Law Dictionary defines: 'GLOSSA' - “It is a poisonous gloss which corrupts the essence of the text”. Meaning that by using a Glossa in a document they are trying to conceal or confuse the real facts. If you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL-UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL if you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALLf you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So, you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL-UPPER CASE. If you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL-UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So, you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL Soon you will realize that virtually all court orders, speeding tickets and most other legal documents actually make no sense whatsoever. They only make sense when we make the assumption that it is all plain English and we read it as one, once you take one away from the other – it renders the document useless. Seeing as the ‘government’ is simply a privately owned Corporation, it can only impose fines and acts upon other corporations. And by tricking us to registering our names as a corporate entity and then tricking us into thinking these names are physically us, it manages to get us to represent the corporately registered name and therefore bear the burden of fines and policies. This is a crime known as “personage”. Hand in hand with “personage” comes a crime known as “barratry” which is knowingly bringing false claims into court- This is what police, politicians, judges are doing daily. The Birth-Certificate, Two-Names, Two-Dates and Two-Languages? Capitis Diminutio Maxima (Name in ALL CAPITALS) For the purposes of understanding one's legal or commercial status under the Admiralty system (the law system used in England, Canada and much of the US), it is necessary to examine the curious use of all CAPS -Capitis Diminutio Maxima- in legal and domestic income tax forms, credit cards & statements, loans, mortgages, speeding & parking tickets, car documents, road tax, court summons etc. While seemingly a trite concern, this apparently small detail has extremely deep significance for all of us! Gage Canadian Dictionary 1983 Sec. 4 defines Capitalize adj. as "To take advantage of - To use to one's own advantage." Black's Law Dictionary – Revised 4th Edition 1968, provides a more comprehensive definition as follows … Capitis Diminutio (meaning the diminishing of status through the use of capitalization)- In Roman law. A diminishing or abridgment of personality; a loss or curtailment of a man's status or aggregate of leg al attributes and qualifications.

Subscribe thank You https://www.youtube.com/@constitutionalconventions6240 Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 Copy Right STRAWMAN & Live Birth to Become the Beneficiary WARNING – PRIVATE PROPERTY NO TRESSPASSING BY CLAIM OF RIGHT OF THE PRIVATE OWNER This includes any and all Government Agents, Those so trespassing are subject to civil and criminal penalties This NO TRESPASS notice is also subject to the following provisions: You are hereby notified that the owner(s) of this property requires all public officials, agents, or person(s) abide by the “Supreme Law of the Land” \ Owner(s) refuse to permit any access, search, audit, assessment, or inspection whatsoever of this property without the presentation of a warrant. Alleged zoning or land use code violations do not establish constitutional reasons for entering this property. VIOLATORS WILL BE TREATED AS INTRUDERS ANY Government official, agent, or any other person(s) entering this property without express consent of the owner(s) and without proper warrants, will be considered an intruder attempting to trespass, extort,injure,threaten, harass intimidate, or otherwise jeopardize the life and property of the owner of this property. Use of necessary force may be used at the sole discretion of the owner(s) If you need to provide any notice to the owner(s) all notices can be sent to the post office under “General Delivery” WARNING – PRIVATE PROPERTY Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 https://rumble.com/v4govwc-facts-vs-fiction-know-who-owns-the-land-not-canada-or-their-corrup-peice-of.html A beneficiary is a person (or entity) who is designated to receive the benefits of property owned by someone else. https://www.ontario.ca/page/get-or-replace-ontario-birth-certificate CIPO online \https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/canadian-intellectual-property-office/en Alberta Live Birth Cerificate https://formsmgmt.gov.ab.ca/Public/DVS11163B.xdp BC Live Birth Order certificates and copies https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/life-events/order-certificates-copies Canadian Intellectual Property Office https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/canadian-intellectual-property-office/en B PROOF OF CLAIM A beneficiary is a person (or entity) who is designated to receive the benefits of property owned by someone else. Rights Doc. 4 WE are all born with free will and unalienable rights. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law’ Consent makes the contract Adhesion contracts are not contracts because there was no consent, they are considered as gifts. We do not require any corporate created rights, such as the Charter of Rights and Freedom provided by the Government of Canada Corporation and/or ICCPR provided by the United Nations Corporation. If anyone claims to have jurisdiction over, you and/or requests payment request a copy of the contract. Government Corporations Government Services Corporations doing business as Government of Canada and/or the government of any provinces can only create rules (statutes) that only apply to their employees, franchisees, officers and dependents. Their rules (statutes) do not apply to the people in general. That is why the rules they create (statutes) are referred to as “public policy”. We do not require any corporate created rights, such as the Charter of Rights and Freedom provided by the Government of Canada Corporation and/or ICCPR provided by the United Nations Corporation. Women and men living in Canada are not subject to any Public Policies, mandates, or acts of legislation promoted by any commercial or municipal corporation for its officers and employees. We should not vote in private corporate shareholder elections sponsored by Canada Inc., Province of _____ Inc., or any other foreign corporation. All Acts, Bills and statutes created by the Government of Canada and/or any of the provincial governments only apply to “person”. The definition of person in Black’s Law Dictionary Fifth Edition on page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being ( i.e. natural person ) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words, if I say the basket includes apples and oranges you will not find any other type of fruit in the basket. As plainly stated in Black’s Law dictionary, anything that applies to person only applies to a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Does not apply to men or women! The Government of Canada and Government of all provinces are Crown for profit Corporations. The Prime Minister and/or the Premiers receive their orders from the shareholders of the Crown Corporation. They are the C.E.O.s/officers of the Crown Corporations. They carry out the orders that are relayed to them by the Governor General and/or the Lieutenant Governor. They (politicians) are in place to take the blame for the harm that is done to the people. They are replaced every four years with someone who claims that he/she is going to right the wrongs that were created, but nothing changes they carry out the orders provided by the shareholders as the previous C.E.O.s. Four years later they are blamed and replaced. PERSONS All Acts, Bills and statutes created by the Government of Canada and/or any of the provincial governments only apply to “person”. The definition of person in Black’s Law Dictionary Fifth Edition on page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being (i.e. natural person ) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words, if I say the basket includes apples and oranges you will not find any other type of fruit in the basket. As plainly stated in Black’s Law dictionary, anything that applies to person only applies to a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Does not apply to men or women _________________________________________________________ Name written in all capital letters The governing book of the English language is “The Oxford Styles Manual” which sometimes refers to “The Chicago Manual of Style” also The Oxford Manual of Style. All Uppercase text, all caps, or gloss is listed in the style's manuals under “foreign - language” , named ”Ancient-Latin” or Dog Latin. All Caps are not defined or recognized in meaning. All Caps is not English although you may think you are able to read it as English it is in fact, a calculated deception to be read separated from the rest of the “Document”. All Uppercase text has no lawful grammatical jurisdiction with common English and is a foreign language, headed under “Ancient-Latin”. (The Chicago Manual of Style, 16th Edition, 11:144-47). Glossa is two or more languages on a legal document. Glossa is a poisonous gloss which corrupts the essence of a text( Black’s Law Dictionary page 621 5th Edition) “Glossa” is also used to conceal or confuse the real facts in order to confuse, in order to gain tacit consent. A name written in all capital letters is written in dog Latin or is known as systemic text “a thing” created by the employees of the crown corporation, Therefore the Crown Corporation owns the creation. If you claim that the name written in all capital letters, is, you. You are admitting you are the property of the Crown Corporation (a slave). Cestui Que Vie Trust 's beneficiary is the name in all capital letters which is the property of the Crown Corporation, it is not you. All governments (corporations) and businesses such as banks and others that write your name in all capital letters are committing constructive fraud and conversion. (Engaged in criminal activity) ___________________________________________________ City, Municipality, Village et al Address Date TO: Mayor, CAO, CEO, Councillors et al FROM: The men and women living therein, The enclosed documentation: 1) Proof of Incorporation of the following entities; from Dunn & Bradstreet or EDGAR Search U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Note: the following are government services corporations’ (dba( "doing business as,") Government of Canada, EDGAR (CIK 0000230098) ; Government of British Columbia, EDGAR (CIK 0000836136) and (CIK 0000014306) ; Government of Alberta, EDGAR (CIK 0000810961) ; Government of Saskatchewan, EDGAR (CIK 0000203098) ; Government of Manitoba, EDGAR (CIK 0000826926) ; Ontario, EDGAR (CIK 0000074615) ; Quebec, EDGAR (0000722803) ; Province of New Brunswick, EDGAR (CIK 0000862406) ; Province of Nova Scotia, EDGAR (CIK 0000842639) 2) Copy of the Clearfield Doctrine; showing that corporations by ANY name DO NOT have the legal jurisdiction to taxation or law enforcement et al, without a consent to contract which is corporate policy when doing commerce. * Seek legal clarification and written proof to the contrary. This letter comes with the enclosed documents to ascertain the jurisdiction within our council, in which official positions are being held . Depending on the Oath, Declaration, or Covenant signed upon entering office, the positions may be operating under the "Color of Law," in a De-Facto, Un-lawful and thus ultra vires standing. This holds personal liability for anything signed on behalf of the people. There are 3 possible jurisdictions: A) Government Office: a PUBLIC OFFICE institution with full legal authority and jurisdiction to taxation, schools, infrastructure, peace keeping, hospital, courts, et al. as services, and needs of the local men and women therein. B) Having as the "Trustee" full fiduciary control of the "Trusts" set up to care for the local needs. De-jure/ lawful B) Non-Governmental Office, (NGO): a PRIVATE CORPORATE OFFICE, without the legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. This entity provides "Service Contracts," which requires contracts and consent to contract by those involved in the services. It's known as "Body Corporate," and serves "Incorporated Inhabitants." Did the men and women give consent to be incorporated? That's called FRAUD. Who is the "Head of Council" or "Global Mayor?" (“A created fiction” The Executive Control and Authority comes from the Corporation of the Province wherein we reside, and to which your office would receive the Acts, Statutes, Bylaws et al directly, through downloads from the corporation and are corporate policies not district policies. De-facto/ un-lawful/FRAUD C) Public/Private/Partnerships, (PPP): an International Entity one which downloads "FOREIGN," Corporate policies, UN/United Nations, WEF/ World Economic Forum, WHO/ World Health Organization et al. In this position there is also no legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. Consent to contract is a legal requirement to contract with the men and women. Did the men and women consent to Foreign Corporate Policies and occupation in the community without knowledge or consent? Are the United Nations Sustainable Goals/SDG's, Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 policies being implemented? Who has fiduciary control over the local Trusts as their Trustee? Who is the "Head of Council," and "Council of the Whole." “A fiction” De-Facto, un-lawful/FRAUD These are jurisdictional questions that are important to ascertain because through the stroke of a pen, a man or woman is being put into extreme personal liability for the agreements and infrastructures signed on to. Furthermore, there are 3 levels of Lawful/de-jure/jurisdictions LOCAL, PROVINCIAL, and FEDERAL - Each has their sphere of lawful jurisdiction and geographical area - Each has independent legislative, fiduciary, and judicial powers - NO level can legislate for the other jurisdiction NOR has the authority to operate beyond its purview We the people have come to ascertain for ourselves the jurisdiction WE are in because the last few years have shown us that something has gone horribly awry at the local level. We the people voted for positions of service to the local jurisdiction. Was there comprehension of the meaning of the oath, declaration or covenant sworn, upon taking office? Was time given to properly peruse any documents to sign and vote on? Many of these documents were written over many years, by legal firms and lawyers, whose signatures are not within the documents...whose are! They contain legalise, a language unto itself, and is the basis for how most FRAUD has occurred. Words like person, individual, inhabitant, resident, citizen, et al have a completely different meaning in these documents. FRAUD vitiates everything. We the people intend on restoring Peace, Order, and Lawful Governance should our suspicions prove correct. We require a response by ________________________________ and expect such from our elected officials. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law, and thus consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls upon the claimant. No response is considered tacit agreement. ______________________________________________________ Regional District of Address Date TO: Board Chair, CAO, CEO, Directors et al FROM: The enclosed documentation: 1) Proof of the Incorporation of the following entities, NOTE: government services corporations (dba:"doing business as,") EDGAR Search U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; Government of Canada, (CIK 0000230098) Government of British Columbia, (CIK 0000836136) and (CIK 0000014306) Government of Alberta, (CIK 0000810961) Government of Saskatchewan, (CIK 0000203098) Government of Manitoba, (CIK 0000826926) Ontario, (CIK 0000074615) Quebec, (CIK 0000722803) Province of New Brunswick, (CIK 0000862406) Province of Nova Scotia, (CIK 0000842639) 2) Copy of The CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE; showing that Corporations by ANY name DO NOT have the legal jurisdiction to Taxation or Law Enforcement et al without consent to contract by those involved in the transaction. Personal liability is then enforceable upon those acting illegally. The enclosed documents show that the Regional District through its Incorporation may be operating under the "Color of Law" and as such is de-facto, un-lawful, and ultra-vires. This information is not hear-say nor opinion, rather they state the facts of the matter, which are; ?- What Oath, Declaration, or Covenant was signed upon the commencement of the positions in council? These matter! ?- What jurisdiction is the office under? There are 3 possible Jurisdictions; 1) Government Office: a PUBLIC OFFICE institution, with lawful de-jure status as a holder of the "PUBLIC TRUST", Trustee with Fiduciary control, and thus legal authority to the taxation of the men and women within a geographical area, and is one of "service" to the local needs; school, hospital, peace keeping, infrastructure, courts, et al. 2) Non-Governmental Office (NGO): a PRIVATE CORPORATE OFFICE, that provides "Service Contracts," and is known as a "Body Corporate" to "Incorporated Inhabitants." This jurisdiction requires Consent to Contract, is de-facto, un-lawful and as such has NO legal jurisdiction to taxation. The Executive Control and Authority comes from the corporation of the province wherein the office is located. The Acts, Statutes, Bylaws et al are downloaded to the district and are corporate policies. 3) Public/Private/Partnerships (PPP) : an INTERNATIONAL ENTITY, receiving downloads from a "FOREIGN" Corporation; United Nations, WHO/World Health Organization, WEF/World Economic Forum et al. This is also a de-facto, un-lawful jurisdiction with NO legal grounds to the taxation of men and women, and also requires Consent to Contract. NOTE: In British Columbia, as an example, The BC Assessment Authority is a CROWN Corporation, created in 1974 by the Corporation of British Columbia Inc., "in order to earn profit for the Government of British Columbia Inc., without jurisdiction nor contracts with the men and women of BC. NOTE: There are 3 levels of lawful, de-jure governance Local, Provincial and Federal - Each has their sphere of jurisdiction and geographical area - Each has independent legislative, fiduciary, and judicial powers - NO level can legislate for the other jurisdiction NOR has the authority to operate beyond its purview These 2 questions are the most important because the answer to them will establish the personal liability through the signature/autograph put upon the documents requiring a vote. Was there full comprehension of the Oath, Declaration, or Covenant signed when entering office as a Director? Was there time to peruse any documents requiring a vote? Most often these documents are many pages long and were made over many years, by legal firms and lawyers whose signatures are NOT contained therein. Whose is? Making that signature "personally" liable for the decisions made Was there full comprehension of the difference between the legal wording contained therein, and the knowledge of their meanings? Such as person, individual, constituent, citizen,et al. "Legalese" is a language unto itself and is the basis for most FRAUD, which in law vitiates everything. The men and women in our Regional District Office were empowered by the men and women, to operate under, and in a jurisdiction that is de-jure, lawful, and with a fiduciary trust, to serve the men and women of our geographical area and no other. To ensure that the needs of the local men, women, and their property were the priority and responsibility of the Regional District. So...What Office is held? Lawfully/de-jure or unlawfully and de-facto? We require an answer, on or before __________________ No answer will be considered a tacit agreement. The office of the Regional District is held by the trust of the members of our community, the neighbours and friends who voted for positions in an office to serve the community. That's why we require proof of what oath, declaration, or covenant was given. The men and women of __________________ _________________________________________________________ Notice of Demand and Trespass Proof of Jurisdiction and Contract Proof of Claim It has come to our attention, the concerned men and women, that our Educational Institutions, whose service to us is the education of our sons and daughters (hereafter named as our "property") has implemented the SOGI 123 Program without a consent to contract. HISTORY; this program began in 2007 through the ARC Foundation. A private foundation based in Vancouver, British Columbia Inc. Other corporations involved in the funding are; British Columbia Ministry of Education Inc.; British Columbia Teachers Federation Inc.; University of British Columbia Inc., and through private donations( gifts from registered charities also corporations), and the corporation of Canada Inc. Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Documents included herein: - Proof of the incorporation of Government of Canada Inc., Government of British Columbia Inc. - Copy of the "CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE", a 1942 court case, accepted worldwide because it's corporate, commerce law. Clearly stating the requirement of contracts Governments lose their sovereignty when they become corporations, thus no different than Canadian Tire using Canadian Tire money. - Copy of the definition of "GLOSSA", pertinent in this matter because it's a matter of concealment, meant to confuse using "text" to corrupt the real facts in order to gain tacit consent. There's no statute of limitation on fraud. - Our Mayoral, Councillor, and Regional Districts are also incorporated through the removal of many of the municipal powers in 2004 with the Local Government Act incorporated into the Community Charter, prior to this; the local mayor had full de-jure and lawful jurisdiction, in relation to our schools. - Copy of the definition of the All Capital Identity, created with the "Birth Certificate," a fiction, constructive fraud and conversion. - Copy of the 10 Points of Contract Law, made simple for comprehension on this matter. - Copy of the 12 Presumptions of Court. Included for the comprehension of status. Fundamentally, the fraud upon our property when born, vitiates any Board jurisdiction to the ownership of our property. We, the men and women who created them, own them. "He who creates owns!" A maxim in law Therefore, it is incumbent upon those who have positions on the Board to cease and desist the SOGI 123 Program which is an infringement upon the property known as our sons and daughters. Failure to do so as corporate entities, through Contract Law, we intend on exercising our jurisdiction, as is our right, to the fullest extent upon the men and women personally sitting on the Board. We strongly suggest a consultation with a lawyer, who by the way wrote this mess. "Praetextu legis injusta agens duplo puniendus" We the People DO NOT require legal Re-presentation in this matter because we're well aware of the 12 Presumptions of Court. I doubt any lawyer will be willing to assist the men and women on the Board, regardless of the facts, because through their: legalize they do deceive. Be it therefore noted, with the documents contained herein, that our claim of proof of contract and the jurisdictional fraud, put against us and our property is considered a trespass. It is the duty of men and women to discuss these delicate matters with our property within our own jurisdiction. We are not against the health and wellbeing of another's property, within their jurisdiction, rather not in the educational setting. We the People, regarding our property in the care of the educational system, again, reiterate, and declare that the burden of proof falls on the claimant. Consider the response with wisdom and discernment since we voted men and women into what we thought was a Educational Office not a Corporate Office. We require no more than 7 days for implementing the redressing of the trespass against our property, with the immediate removal of any and all literature, electronic or written, devices, toys (we use the word with baited breath) et al in relation to the SOGI 123 PROGRAM post haste. For it was through corporate policies, without contractual consent, that the trespass has been made against our property thus creating this claim against those men and women on the Board personally. Furthermore, do not be deceived into thinking that the registration of our property into the corporation rather than an educational institution voids any responsibility on the part of the men and women on the Board, as it was done in fraud. Again we'll state that fraud vitiates everything. In all fairness to the men and women on the Board, our neighbours, not the corporations involved, perhaps unaware of the situation mentioned above and the personal liability for this trespass, We the People will support the men and women in this matter of remedy, because we trusted that their service, while sitting on the Board, was to serve our property with a lawful education. No response will be considered a tacit agreement. Sincerely and without prejudice or malice We the People Autograph_______________________:________ __________________________________________________________ Statement of Claim Taxation Between the Corporation of ______________________________________ And the noted particulars on the documents included herein. The above corporation has not proved jurisdiction, consent to contract, nor provide proof of a contract to claim the monies expected in taxation, hence tacit agreement to this claim. Who claims this debt be true, who claims this debt to due? Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Three requirements were made in writing to the Corporations Finance Minister to provide said proof, and are included in this document. Furthermore, copies of the Clearfield Doctrine, EDGAR # for the Corporation involved, Regina-v-John Anthony Hill 12 May, 2011 at Southwark Crown Court, Case # T20107746, (the Queen declared, "Lawfully NOT valid Monarch, hence Charles the III too),and "Glossa," (see Black's Law) corrupts the essence of the text presented on your documents. This refusal of consent to contract extends from this day forward, as noted with receipt of this document, until such a date in the future when there is a de-jure government upon the landmass commonly known worldwide as Canada, British Columbia, et al. Autograph _________________________:___________________________ Dated this day _______________________________________________________ Proof of Claim Re: Property Tax; Contract and Proof of Consent to Contract Between the Corporation of ___________________________________________________ and _____________________________________________________________________________ Regarding the property registered as; ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ It is required and incumbent upon the Corporations Minister of Finance, to provide proof of jurisdiction as a corporation, to taxation without full disclosure of the facts, and consent to contract, as per contract law. See: The Clearfield Doctrine; Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. 363 Syllabus CLEARFIELD TRUST CO. et al. v. UNITED STATES CERTIORARI to the CIRCUIT COURT of APPEALS for the THIRD CIRCUIT No. 490 Argued February 5, 1943 Decided March 1, 1943(and accepted worldwide when conducting commerce) Further to the above noted court case, this requirement will be expected within 7 days receipt of this claim for proof of the jurisdictional obligation by the corporation to taxation to the property noted herein. Who claims this debt be true, who claims this debt be due? Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Property Taxes have been paid previously without consent to contract, due to the fraud perpetrated without full disclosure of the fact that the corporation mentioned herein, was not a lawful government with the de-jure jurisdiction to taxation, thus Ultra-Vires. Rather, a corporation whose name included the words "government," which is fraud based on Black's Law Dictionary, any edition. No response will be confirmation of a tacit agreement to the above. Thanking you in advance, Autograph: _________________________:_____________________________ Dated this day: ______________________________________ ______________________________________________________ STATEMENT of CLAIM Date:_____________________ STATE of TITLE CERTIFICATE: Certificate number________________________________________ Land Title Office__________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ Title Number______________________________________________ Registered Owner__________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Taxation Authority__________________________________________ Description of Land__________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Charges, Liens and Interests_____________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ Proof of contract is required to provide evidence of any claim made upon the aforementioned property; taxation; land use; water use; structures and buildings above, on, or below the land; any and all animals thereon; any and all chattles upon said land; et al, provide proof of any contractual obligation having been made with respect to said land. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law, and thus consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. (See: Regina-v-John Anthony Hill 12 May, 2011 at Southwark Crown Court, Case # T20107746, in which the Queen was declared to be a "Lawfully NOT Valid Monarch." Hence, neither is Charles the III) (See: Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. 363, Syllabus. Clearfield trust Co.et al. v. United States, Certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.No. 490. Argued February 5, 1943 Decided March 1, 1943 ; and accepted worldwide when conducting commerce) The requirement to provide Proof of Contract within this Statement of Claim, is expected within ____________days from receipt of the documentation herein. No response will be considered a tacit agreement to the above. Autograph_________________________:_______________________ :GLOSSA: ~ The 'Born-Date' Vs. the 'Registration-Date' Does your Birth Certificate identify YOU as TWO people, not one? (You is plural, one and another) Have you ever wondered why your SURNAME is written using the ALL UPPERCASE TEXT? Put simply, 'you' are using a ‘Legal’ name and this is fraud. See the ‘name’ is actually split up into separate entities – The Christian-name and The ‘Surname’. You register these names to the Crown Corporation LTD. as their Property by your Birth Certificate which is given a bond number. Your physical value is used as collateral for these bonds allowing the United Kingdom LTD. to take out loans from private Banks, such as 'Bank of England' and profit is made by way of legal fines (Acts & Statutes), bills and taxation. – Hence money is no longer backed by Gold or Silver, but by our physical value or man power. The UNITED KINGDOM LTD is a privately owned Corporation-ship. And corporations are considered ‘ships’ and they are governed under the law of the sea, known as Maritime Law. There is no real 'ship' but a 'document-vessel' – which in our case was our Birth Certificate Created by the Doctor when s/he ‘docked’ you. TAKE NOTICE Whenever you encounter the Legal Document (document-vessel) you will notice that your surname (or sometimes all of your names) will be written using the ALL-UPPERCASE TEXT. This is no coincidence - the ALL UPPERCASE text is not defined or recognized in The Oxford Styles Manual, (the governing book of the English language) – meaning that although you may be able to read it as English, it is in fact, NOT English. The all CAPS or Gloss can be found within the 'Oxford Styles Manual', under 'foreign-languages', named 'Ancient-Latin' The main place this ALL-UPPERCASE text is found to be defined as a language, is when American Sign Language (ASL), a signing language used for the deaf, is written. ASL can be defined in the book ‘The Chicago Manual of Style’ under the foreign-languages header: American Sign Language (ASL) compound signs, 10.152 and ‘glosses, 10.147’. Thus, defining this text as a foreign language Further going on to say that when written, it has no 1-to-1 correspondence with any other languages on the document. The all CAPS or Gloss is also found in the 'Oxford Styles Manual', under foreign-languages, 'Ancient-Latin', however as the all caps UK LTD is registered in [Washington D.C[, they seem to be using the 'Chicago Manual of Style' , not the Oxford. Putting two or more languages onto a legal document is known in law as a ‘Glossa’. Black's Law Dictionary defines: 'GLOSSA' - “It is a poisonous gloss which corrupts the essence of the text”. Meaning that by using a Glossa in a document they are trying to conceal or confuse the real facts. If you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL-UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL if you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALLf you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So, you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL-UPPER CASE. If you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL-UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So, you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL Soon you will realize that virtually all court orders, speeding tickets and most other legal documents actually make no sense whatsoever. They only make sense when we make the assumption that it is all plain English and we read it as one, once you take one away from the other – it renders the document useless. Seeing as the ‘government’ is simply a privately owned Corporation, it can only impose fines and acts upon other corporations. And by tricking us to registering our names as a corporate entity and then tricking us into thinking these names are physically us, it manages to get us to represent the corporately registered name and therefore bear the burden of fines and policies. This is a crime known as “personage”. Hand in hand with “personage” comes a crime known as “barratry” which is knowingly bringing false claims into court- This is what police, politicians, judges are doing daily. The Birth-Certificate, Two-Names, Two-Dates and Two-Languages? Capitis Diminutio Maxima (Name in ALL CAPITALS) For the purposes of understanding one's legal or commercial status under the Admiralty system (the law system used in England, Canada and much of the US), it is necessary to examine the curious use of all CAPS -Capitis Diminutio Maxima- in legal and domestic income tax forms, credit cards & statements, loans, mortgages, speeding & parking tickets, car documents, road tax, court summons etc. While seemingly a trite concern, this apparently small detail has extremely deep significance for all of us! Gage Canadian Dictionary 1983 Sec. 4 defines Capitalize adj. as "To take advantage of - To use to one's own advantage." Black's Law Dictionary – Revised 4th Edition 1968, provides a more comprehensive definition as follows … Capitis Diminutio (meaning the diminishing of status through the use of capitalization)- In Roman law. A diminishing or abridgment of personality; a loss or curtailment of a man's status or aggregate of leg al attributes and qualifications.

Subscribe to get important Information https://constitutionalconventions.ca/contact/ - ensure you get confirmation - check spam or junk mail. Zoom 5-10 EST daily https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6945489985?pwd=UllwRmwzRUhWS2pXUWNQODNEbnhSZz09 SwT80SwT8 https://rumble.com/v4govwc-facts-vs-fiction-know-who-owns-the-land-not-canada-or-their-corrup-peice-of.html A beneficiary is a person (or entity) who is designated to receive the benefits of property owned by someone else. https://www.ontario.ca/page/get-or-replace-ontario-birth-certificate CIPO online \https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/canadian-intellectual-property-office/en Alberta Live Birth Cerificate https://formsmgmt.gov.ab.ca/Public/DVS11163B.xdp BC Live Birth Order certificates and copies https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/life-events/order-certificates-copies Canadian Intellectual Property Office https://ised-isde.canada.ca/site/canadian-intellectual-property-office/en B PROOF OF CLAIM A beneficiary is a person (or entity) who is designated to receive the benefits of property owned by someone else. Rights Doc. 4 WE are all born with free will and unalienable rights. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law’ Consent makes the contract Adhesion contracts are not contracts because there was no consent, they are considered as gifts. We do not require any corporate created rights, such as the Charter of Rights and Freedom provided by the Government of Canada Corporation and/or ICCPR provided by the United Nations Corporation. If anyone claims to have jurisdiction over, you and/or requests payment request a copy of the contract. Government Corporations Government Services Corporations doing business as Government of Canada and/or the government of any provinces can only create rules (statutes) that only apply to their employees, franchisees, officers and dependents. Their rules (statutes) do not apply to the people in general. That is why the rules they create (statutes) are referred to as “public policy”. We do not require any corporate created rights, such as the Charter of Rights and Freedom provided by the Government of Canada Corporation and/or ICCPR provided by the United Nations Corporation. Women and men living in Canada are not subject to any Public Policies, mandates, or acts of legislation promoted by any commercial or municipal corporation for its officers and employees. We should not vote in private corporate shareholder elections sponsored by Canada Inc., Province of _____ Inc., or any other foreign corporation. All Acts, Bills and statutes created by the Government of Canada and/or any of the provincial governments only apply to “person”. The definition of person in Black’s Law Dictionary Fifth Edition on page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being ( i.e. natural person ) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words, if I say the basket includes apples and oranges you will not find any other type of fruit in the basket. As plainly stated in Black’s Law dictionary, anything that applies to person only applies to a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Does not apply to men or women! The Government of Canada and Government of all provinces are Crown for profit Corporations. The Prime Minister and/or the Premiers receive their orders from the shareholders of the Crown Corporation. They are the C.E.O.s/officers of the Crown Corporations. They carry out the orders that are relayed to them by the Governor General and/or the Lieutenant Governor. They (politicians) are in place to take the blame for the harm that is done to the people. They are replaced every four years with someone who claims that he/she is going to right the wrongs that were created, but nothing changes they carry out the orders provided by the shareholders as the previous C.E.O.s. Four years later they are blamed and replaced. PERSONS All Acts, Bills and statutes created by the Government of Canada and/or any of the provincial governments only apply to “person”. The definition of person in Black’s Law Dictionary Fifth Edition on page 1028 states: In general usage, a human being (i.e. natural person ) though by statute term may include a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Maxim: Include, The inclusion of one is the exclusion of another. In other words, if I say the basket includes apples and oranges you will not find any other type of fruit in the basket. As plainly stated in Black’s Law dictionary, anything that applies to person only applies to a firm, labor organization, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers. Does not apply to men or women _________________________________________________________ Name written in all capital letters The governing book of the English language is “The Oxford Styles Manual” which sometimes refers to “The Chicago Manual of Style” also The Oxford Manual of Style. All Uppercase text, all caps, or gloss is listed in the style's manuals under “foreign - language” , named ”Ancient-Latin” or Dog Latin. All Caps are not defined or recognized in meaning. All Caps is not English although you may think you are able to read it as English it is in fact, a calculated deception to be read separated from the rest of the “Document”. All Uppercase text has no lawful grammatical jurisdiction with common English and is a foreign language, headed under “Ancient-Latin”. (The Chicago Manual of Style, 16th Edition, 11:144-47). Glossa is two or more languages on a legal document. Glossa is a poisonous gloss which corrupts the essence of a text( Black’s Law Dictionary page 621 5th Edition) “Glossa” is also used to conceal or confuse the real facts in order to confuse, in order to gain tacit consent. A name written in all capital letters is written in dog Latin or is known as systemic text “a thing” created by the employees of the crown corporation, Therefore the Crown Corporation owns the creation. If you claim that the name written in all capital letters, is, you. You are admitting you are the property of the Crown Corporation (a slave). Cestui Que Vie Trust 's beneficiary is the name in all capital letters which is the property of the Crown Corporation, it is not you. All governments (corporations) and businesses such as banks and others that write your name in all capital letters are committing constructive fraud and conversion. (Engaged in criminal activity) ___________________________________________________ City, Municipality, Village et al Address Date TO: Mayor, CAO, CEO, Councillors et al FROM: The men and women living therein, The enclosed documentation: 1) Proof of Incorporation of the following entities; from Dunn & Bradstreet or EDGAR Search U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Note: the following are government services corporations’ (dba( "doing business as,") Government of Canada, EDGAR (CIK 0000230098) ; Government of British Columbia, EDGAR (CIK 0000836136) and (CIK 0000014306) ; Government of Alberta, EDGAR (CIK 0000810961) ; Government of Saskatchewan, EDGAR (CIK 0000203098) ; Government of Manitoba, EDGAR (CIK 0000826926) ; Ontario, EDGAR (CIK 0000074615) ; Quebec, EDGAR (0000722803) ; Province of New Brunswick, EDGAR (CIK 0000862406) ; Province of Nova Scotia, EDGAR (CIK 0000842639) 2) Copy of the Clearfield Doctrine; showing that corporations by ANY name DO NOT have the legal jurisdiction to taxation or law enforcement et al, without a consent to contract which is corporate policy when doing commerce. * Seek legal clarification and written proof to the contrary. This letter comes with the enclosed documents to ascertain the jurisdiction within our council, in which official positions are being held . Depending on the Oath, Declaration, or Covenant signed upon entering office, the positions may be operating under the "Color of Law," in a De-Facto, Un-lawful and thus ultra vires standing. This holds personal liability for anything signed on behalf of the people. There are 3 possible jurisdictions: A) Government Office: a PUBLIC OFFICE institution with full legal authority and jurisdiction to taxation, schools, infrastructure, peace keeping, hospital, courts, et al. as services, and needs of the local men and women therein. B) Having as the "Trustee" full fiduciary control of the "Trusts" set up to care for the local needs. De-jure/ lawful B) Non-Governmental Office, (NGO): a PRIVATE CORPORATE OFFICE, without the legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. This entity provides "Service Contracts," which requires contracts and consent to contract by those involved in the services. It's known as "Body Corporate," and serves "Incorporated Inhabitants." Did the men and women give consent to be incorporated? That's called FRAUD. Who is the "Head of Council" or "Global Mayor?" (“A created fiction” The Executive Control and Authority comes from the Corporation of the Province wherein we reside, and to which your office would receive the Acts, Statutes, Bylaws et al directly, through downloads from the corporation and are corporate policies not district policies. De-facto/ un-lawful/FRAUD C) Public/Private/Partnerships, (PPP): an International Entity one which downloads "FOREIGN," Corporate policies, UN/United Nations, WEF/ World Economic Forum, WHO/ World Health Organization et al. In this position there is also no legal authority or jurisdiction to taxation. Consent to contract is a legal requirement to contract with the men and women. Did the men and women consent to Foreign Corporate Policies and occupation in the community without knowledge or consent? Are the United Nations Sustainable Goals/SDG's, Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 policies being implemented? Who has fiduciary control over the local Trusts as their Trustee? Who is the "Head of Council," and "Council of the Whole." “A fiction” De-Facto, un-lawful/FRAUD These are jurisdictional questions that are important to ascertain because through the stroke of a pen, a man or woman is being put into extreme personal liability for the agreements and infrastructures signed on to. Furthermore, there are 3 levels of Lawful/de-jure/jurisdictions LOCAL, PROVINCIAL, and FEDERAL - Each has their sphere of lawful jurisdiction and geographical area - Each has independent legislative, fiduciary, and judicial powers - NO level can legislate for the other jurisdiction NOR has the authority to operate beyond its purview We the people have come to ascertain for ourselves the jurisdiction WE are in because the last few years have shown us that something has gone horribly awry at the local level. We the people voted for positions of service to the local jurisdiction. Was there comprehension of the meaning of the oath, declaration or covenant sworn, upon taking office? Was time given to properly peruse any documents to sign and vote on? Many of these documents were written over many years, by legal firms and lawyers, whose signatures are not within the documents...whose are! They contain legalise, a language unto itself, and is the basis for how most FRAUD has occurred. Words like person, individual, inhabitant, resident, citizen, et al have a completely different meaning in these documents. FRAUD vitiates everything. We the people intend on restoring Peace, Order, and Lawful Governance should our suspicions prove correct. We require a response by ________________________________ and expect such from our elected officials. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law, and thus consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls upon the claimant. No response is considered tacit agreement. ______________________________________________________ Regional District of Address Date TO: Board Chair, CAO, CEO, Directors et al FROM: The enclosed documentation: 1) Proof of the Incorporation of the following entities, NOTE: government services corporations (dba:"doing business as,") EDGAR Search U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; Government of Canada, (CIK 0000230098) Government of British Columbia, (CIK 0000836136) and (CIK 0000014306) Government of Alberta, (CIK 0000810961) Government of Saskatchewan, (CIK 0000203098) Government of Manitoba, (CIK 0000826926) Ontario, (CIK 0000074615) Quebec, (CIK 0000722803) Province of New Brunswick, (CIK 0000862406) Province of Nova Scotia, (CIK 0000842639) 2) Copy of The CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE; showing that Corporations by ANY name DO NOT have the legal jurisdiction to Taxation or Law Enforcement et al without consent to contract by those involved in the transaction. Personal liability is then enforceable upon those acting illegally. The enclosed documents show that the Regional District through its Incorporation may be operating under the "Color of Law" and as such is de-facto, un-lawful, and ultra-vires. This information is not hear-say nor opinion, rather they state the facts of the matter, which are; ?- What Oath, Declaration, or Covenant was signed upon the commencement of the positions in council? These matter! ?- What jurisdiction is the office under? There are 3 possible Jurisdictions; 1) Government Office: a PUBLIC OFFICE institution, with lawful de-jure status as a holder of the "PUBLIC TRUST", Trustee with Fiduciary control, and thus legal authority to the taxation of the men and women within a geographical area, and is one of "service" to the local needs; school, hospital, peace keeping, infrastructure, courts, et al. 2) Non-Governmental Office (NGO): a PRIVATE CORPORATE OFFICE, that provides "Service Contracts," and is known as a "Body Corporate" to "Incorporated Inhabitants." This jurisdiction requires Consent to Contract, is de-facto, un-lawful and as such has NO legal jurisdiction to taxation. The Executive Control and Authority comes from the corporation of the province wherein the office is located. The Acts, Statutes, Bylaws et al are downloaded to the district and are corporate policies. 3) Public/Private/Partnerships (PPP) : an INTERNATIONAL ENTITY, receiving downloads from a "FOREIGN" Corporation; United Nations, WHO/World Health Organization, WEF/World Economic Forum et al. This is also a de-facto, un-lawful jurisdiction with NO legal grounds to the taxation of men and women, and also requires Consent to Contract. NOTE: In British Columbia, as an example, The BC Assessment Authority is a CROWN Corporation, created in 1974 by the Corporation of British Columbia Inc., "in order to earn profit for the Government of British Columbia Inc., without jurisdiction nor contracts with the men and women of BC. NOTE: There are 3 levels of lawful, de-jure governance Local, Provincial and Federal - Each has their sphere of jurisdiction and geographical area - Each has independent legislative, fiduciary, and judicial powers - NO level can legislate for the other jurisdiction NOR has the authority to operate beyond its purview These 2 questions are the most important because the answer to them will establish the personal liability through the signature/autograph put upon the documents requiring a vote. Was there full comprehension of the Oath, Declaration, or Covenant signed when entering office as a Director? Was there time to peruse any documents requiring a vote? Most often these documents are many pages long and were made over many years, by legal firms and lawyers whose signatures are NOT contained therein. Whose is? Making that signature "personally" liable for the decisions made Was there full comprehension of the difference between the legal wording contained therein, and the knowledge of their meanings? Such as person, individual, constituent, citizen,et al. "Legalese" is a language unto itself and is the basis for most FRAUD, which in law vitiates everything. The men and women in our Regional District Office were empowered by the men and women, to operate under, and in a jurisdiction that is de-jure, lawful, and with a fiduciary trust, to serve the men and women of our geographical area and no other. To ensure that the needs of the local men, women, and their property were the priority and responsibility of the Regional District. So...What Office is held? Lawfully/de-jure or unlawfully and de-facto? We require an answer, on or before __________________ No answer will be considered a tacit agreement. The office of the Regional District is held by the trust of the members of our community, the neighbours and friends who voted for positions in an office to serve the community. That's why we require proof of what oath, declaration, or covenant was given. The men and women of __________________ _________________________________________________________ Notice of Demand and Trespass Proof of Jurisdiction and Contract Proof of Claim It has come to our attention, the concerned men and women, that our Educational Institutions, whose service to us is the education of our sons and daughters (hereafter named as our "property") has implemented the SOGI 123 Program without a consent to contract. HISTORY; this program began in 2007 through the ARC Foundation. A private foundation based in Vancouver, British Columbia Inc. Other corporations involved in the funding are; British Columbia Ministry of Education Inc.; British Columbia Teachers Federation Inc.; University of British Columbia Inc., and through private donations( gifts from registered charities also corporations), and the corporation of Canada Inc. Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Documents included herein: - Proof of the incorporation of Government of Canada Inc., Government of British Columbia Inc. - Copy of the "CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE", a 1942 court case, accepted worldwide because it's corporate, commerce law. Clearly stating the requirement of contracts Governments lose their sovereignty when they become corporations, thus no different than Canadian Tire using Canadian Tire money. - Copy of the definition of "GLOSSA", pertinent in this matter because it's a matter of concealment, meant to confuse using "text" to corrupt the real facts in order to gain tacit consent. There's no statute of limitation on fraud. - Our Mayoral, Councillor, and Regional Districts are also incorporated through the removal of many of the municipal powers in 2004 with the Local Government Act incorporated into the Community Charter, prior to this; the local mayor had full de-jure and lawful jurisdiction, in relation to our schools. - Copy of the definition of the All Capital Identity, created with the "Birth Certificate," a fiction, constructive fraud and conversion. - Copy of the 10 Points of Contract Law, made simple for comprehension on this matter. - Copy of the 12 Presumptions of Court. Included for the comprehension of status. Fundamentally, the fraud upon our property when born, vitiates any Board jurisdiction to the ownership of our property. We, the men and women who created them, own them. "He who creates owns!" A maxim in law Therefore, it is incumbent upon those who have positions on the Board to cease and desist the SOGI 123 Program which is an infringement upon the property known as our sons and daughters. Failure to do so as corporate entities, through Contract Law, we intend on exercising our jurisdiction, as is our right, to the fullest extent upon the men and women personally sitting on the Board. We strongly suggest a consultation with a lawyer, who by the way wrote this mess. "Praetextu legis injusta agens duplo puniendus" We the People DO NOT require legal Re-presentation in this matter because we're well aware of the 12 Presumptions of Court. I doubt any lawyer will be willing to assist the men and women on the Board, regardless of the facts, because through their: legalize they do deceive. Be it therefore noted, with the documents contained herein, that our claim of proof of contract and the jurisdictional fraud, put against us and our property is considered a trespass. It is the duty of men and women to discuss these delicate matters with our property within our own jurisdiction. We are not against the health and wellbeing of another's property, within their jurisdiction, rather not in the educational setting. We the People, regarding our property in the care of the educational system, again, reiterate, and declare that the burden of proof falls on the claimant. Consider the response with wisdom and discernment since we voted men and women into what we thought was a Educational Office not a Corporate Office. We require no more than 7 days for implementing the redressing of the trespass against our property, with the immediate removal of any and all literature, electronic or written, devices, toys (we use the word with baited breath) et al in relation to the SOGI 123 PROGRAM post haste. For it was through corporate policies, without contractual consent, that the trespass has been made against our property thus creating this claim against those men and women on the Board personally. Furthermore, do not be deceived into thinking that the registration of our property into the corporation rather than an educational institution voids any responsibility on the part of the men and women on the Board, as it was done in fraud. Again we'll state that fraud vitiates everything. In all fairness to the men and women on the Board, our neighbours, not the corporations involved, perhaps unaware of the situation mentioned above and the personal liability for this trespass, We the People will support the men and women in this matter of remedy, because we trusted that their service, while sitting on the Board, was to serve our property with a lawful education. No response will be considered a tacit agreement. Sincerely and without prejudice or malice We the People Autograph_______________________:________ __________________________________________________________ Statement of Claim Taxation Between the Corporation of ______________________________________ And the noted particulars on the documents included herein. The above corporation has not proved jurisdiction, consent to contract, nor provide proof of a contract to claim the monies expected in taxation, hence tacit agreement to this claim. Who claims this debt be true, who claims this debt to due? Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Three requirements were made in writing to the Corporations Finance Minister to provide said proof, and are included in this document. Furthermore, copies of the Clearfield Doctrine, EDGAR # for the Corporation involved, Regina-v-John Anthony Hill 12 May, 2011 at Southwark Crown Court, Case # T20107746, (the Queen declared, "Lawfully NOT valid Monarch, hence Charles the III too),and "Glossa," (see Black's Law) corrupts the essence of the text presented on your documents. This refusal of consent to contract extends from this day forward, as noted with receipt of this document, until such a date in the future when there is a de-jure government upon the landmass commonly known worldwide as Canada, British Columbia, et al. Autograph _________________________:___________________________ Dated this day _______________________________________________________ Proof of Claim Re: Property Tax; Contract and Proof of Consent to Contract Between the Corporation of ___________________________________________________ and _____________________________________________________________________________ Regarding the property registered as; ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ It is required and incumbent upon the Corporations Minister of Finance, to provide proof of jurisdiction as a corporation, to taxation without full disclosure of the facts, and consent to contract, as per contract law. See: The Clearfield Doctrine; Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. 363 Syllabus CLEARFIELD TRUST CO. et al. v. UNITED STATES CERTIORARI to the CIRCUIT COURT of APPEALS for the THIRD CIRCUIT No. 490 Argued February 5, 1943 Decided March 1, 1943(and accepted worldwide when conducting commerce) Further to the above noted court case, this requirement will be expected within 7 days receipt of this claim for proof of the jurisdictional obligation by the corporation to taxation to the property noted herein. Who claims this debt be true, who claims this debt be due? Contract makes the law, consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. Property Taxes have been paid previously without consent to contract, due to the fraud perpetrated without full disclosure of the fact that the corporation mentioned herein, was not a lawful government with the de-jure jurisdiction to taxation, thus Ultra-Vires. Rather, a corporation whose name included the words "government," which is fraud based on Black's Law Dictionary, any edition. No response will be confirmation of a tacit agreement to the above. Thanking you in advance, Autograph: _________________________:_____________________________ Dated this day: ______________________________________ ______________________________________________________ STATEMENT of CLAIM Date:_____________________ STATE of TITLE CERTIFICATE: Certificate number________________________________________ Land Title Office__________________________________________ ________________________________________________________ Title Number______________________________________________ Registered Owner__________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________ Taxation Authority__________________________________________ Description of Land__________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Charges, Liens and Interests_____________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ Proof of contract is required to provide evidence of any claim made upon the aforementioned property; taxation; land use; water use; structures and buildings above, on, or below the land; any and all animals thereon; any and all chattles upon said land; et al, provide proof of any contractual obligation having been made with respect to said land. No man or woman has jurisdiction over another man or woman without their consent. Contract makes the law, and thus consent makes the contract. The burden of proof falls on the claimant. (See: Regina-v-John Anthony Hill 12 May, 2011 at Southwark Crown Court, Case # T20107746, in which the Queen was declared to be a "Lawfully NOT Valid Monarch." Hence, neither is Charles the III) (See: Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. 363, Syllabus. Clearfield trust Co.et al. v. United States, Certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.No. 490. Argued February 5, 1943 Decided March 1, 1943 ; and accepted worldwide when conducting commerce) The requirement to provide Proof of Contract within this Statement of Claim, is expected within ____________days from receipt of the documentation herein. No response will be considered a tacit agreement to the above. Autograph_________________________:_______________________ :GLOSSA: ~ The 'Born-Date' Vs. the 'Registration-Date' Does your Birth Certificate identify YOU as TWO people, not one? (You is plural, one and another) Have you ever wondered why your SURNAME is written using the ALL UPPERCASE TEXT? Put simply, 'you' are using a ‘Legal’ name and this is fraud. See the ‘name’ is actually split up into separate entities – The Christian-name and The ‘Surname’. You register these names to the Crown Corporation LTD. as their Property by your Birth Certificate which is given a bond number. Your physical value is used as collateral for these bonds allowing the United Kingdom LTD. to take out loans from private Banks, such as 'Bank of England' and profit is made by way of legal fines (Acts & Statutes), bills and taxation. – Hence money is no longer backed by Gold or Silver, but by our physical value or man power. The UNITED KINGDOM LTD is a privately owned Corporation-ship. And corporations are considered ‘ships’ and they are governed under the law of the sea, known as Maritime Law. There is no real 'ship' but a 'document-vessel' – which in our case was our Birth Certificate Created by the Doctor when s/he ‘docked’ you. TAKE NOTICE Whenever you encounter the Legal Document (document-vessel) you will notice that your surname (or sometimes all of your names) will be written using the ALL-UPPERCASE TEXT. This is no coincidence - the ALL UPPERCASE text is not defined or recognized in The Oxford Styles Manual, (the governing book of the English language) – meaning that although you may be able to read it as English, it is in fact, NOT English. The all CAPS or Gloss can be found within the 'Oxford Styles Manual', under 'foreign-languages', named 'Ancient-Latin' The main place this ALL-UPPERCASE text is found to be defined as a language, is when American Sign Language (ASL), a signing language used for the deaf, is written. ASL can be defined in the book ‘The Chicago Manual of Style’ under the foreign-languages header: American Sign Language (ASL) compound signs, 10.152 and ‘glosses, 10.147’. Thus, defining this text as a foreign language Further going on to say that when written, it has no 1-to-1 correspondence with any other languages on the document. The all CAPS or Gloss is also found in the 'Oxford Styles Manual', under foreign-languages, 'Ancient-Latin', however as the all caps UK LTD is registered in [Washington D.C[, they seem to be using the 'Chicago Manual of Style' , not the Oxford. Putting two or more languages onto a legal document is known in law as a ‘Glossa’. Black's Law Dictionary defines: 'GLOSSA' - “It is a poisonous gloss which corrupts the essence of the text”. Meaning that by using a Glossa in a document they are trying to conceal or confuse the real facts. If you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL-UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL if you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALLf you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So, you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL-UPPER CASE. If you take a second to analyze any documents that are written within the legal realm (driving license, passport, fines, speeding tickets, court orders or summons) you will rapidly realize that while most of the document will be written in normal English, most of the important details are actually in this ALL-UPPERCASE language. Like we established earlier, the ALL-UPPERCASE text and the plain English text cannot be read as one text in a document, they have no jurisdiction over one another. You can only read one at a time. So, you must read all of the English in one go, and then go back to read the ALL Soon you will realize that virtually all court orders, speeding tickets and most other legal documents actually make no sense whatsoever. They only make sense when we make the assumption that it is all plain English and we read it as one, once you take one away from the other – it renders the document useless. Seeing as the ‘government’ is simply a privately owned Corporation, it can only impose fines and acts upon other corporations. And by tricking us to registering our names as a corporate entity and then tricking us into thinking these names are physically us, it manages to get us to represent the corporately registered name and therefore bear the burden of fines and policies. This is a crime known as “personage”. Hand in hand with “personage” comes a crime known as “barratry” which is knowingly bringing false claims into court- This is what police, politicians, judges are doing daily. The Birth-Certificate, Two-Names, Two-Dates and Two-Languages? Capitis Diminutio Maxima (Name in ALL CAPITALS) For the purposes of understanding one's legal or commercial status under the Admiralty system (the law system used in England, Canada and much of the US), it is necessary to examine the curious use of all CAPS -Capitis Diminutio Maxima- in legal and domestic income tax forms, credit cards & statements, loans, mortgages, speeding & parking tickets, car documents, road tax, court summons etc. While seemingly a trite concern, this apparently small detail has extremely deep significance for all of us! Gage Canadian Dictionary 1983 Sec. 4 defines Capitalize adj. as "To take advantage of - To use to one's own advantage." Black's Law Dictionary – Revised 4th Edition 1968, provides a more comprehensive definition as follows … Capitis Diminutio (meaning the diminishing of status through the use of capitalization)- In Roman law. A diminishing or abridgment of personality; a loss or curtailment of a man's status or aggregate of leg al attributes and qualifications.