dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
16
share rss forum feed


sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:13
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·WIND Mobile

1 recommendation

reply to 04193189

Re: Teksavvy website = NEW spy agency for Google & NSA

g777 is very good at misreading legal documents to his own ends.

Take for example, his continuing reference to the charter as meaning the laws of the land.

The charter, put simply, states that governments cannot enact and enforce legislation that violates the rights granted in the charter. It states nothing about the application of laws unless they violate those rights. So, we are all subject to the laws of the land, just not to laws that violate the rights granted under the charter! What the quoted case R vs Dell confirmed was just that ... a person entering a private institution may be subject to investigative detention without the limitations that would be placed on the police (a government agency) doing the same thing.

Common law is nothing more than "precedent" ... and hence "case law" ... Common law applies when there is no specific codified law. Specific codified law therefore trumps common law.

Common law (often derived from religious beliefs) for example states, thou shalt not kill along with "an eye for an eye" whilst at the same time saying one should "turn the other cheek". But codified law states the punishments acceptable to society and the conditions under which killing may be lawful. g777 would have us believe that it's simply thou shalt not kill and who knows what his acceptance of punishment may be. If common law trumped written law, we would be in a real mess!

04193189

join:2012-06-18
Kitchener, ON

1 edit
finally someone with a somewhat valid challenge .. even though it is sbrook .. i have a good memory bud, even at my age

it's sbrook that's misleading ... here's why:
CONSTITUTION ACT clearly states that
"Primacy of Constitution of Canada
52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect."

furthermore "CANADA" / the corporation of Canada has no power on the land unless given so by those who actually own it and hold "title" to it. Everything is only a contract between you and CANADA .. and they are all separate contracts .. no matter how much the police and other government agents threaten and lie.

what is CANADA? »www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/r···-21.html
“Canada”, for greater certainty, includes the internal waters of Canada and the territorial sea of Canada;
“Canadian waters” includes the territorial sea of Canada and the internal waters of Canada;"

territorial waters: »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_waters
Therefore CANADA is only 12 miles of seas and inland waterways surrounding the land and it only has jurisdiction for such. Nothing else. It's an Admiralty entity for the purposes of immigration / delivery of cargo or doing commerce on the seas.

It is expected that anyone coming to this land goes through immigration and once though becomes a settler. There is a whole bunch of laws and privileges on that as well.
Anyone born here is given the chance to become a settler once they have learned their inherent rights and to do private commerce .. for themselves under Common Law.

Common Law is the law of the land and superior to any government. Under it everyone is it's own master, owner and title holder, Director / CEO, etc. .. and as close to God as you can get, even an Angel.
Beware, the penalties for breaching this law is much greater as you are fully responsible for your actions and liabilities ... hence why many contract with CANADA and get insurance .. and hence become wards of the state / chattel / cattle / cargo.

All initial papers with CANADA are contracts, and only contracts = birth certificate [not certificate of live birth which has much more power], social insurance, driver's license, health card etc. It is your choice to continue such or dissolve them. This also includes taxes if you are not running a registered business with CANADA or working for government.
Even with all those contracts you are not subject to them on your own private time. Same as a cop has no power to meddle in your affairs when they are off duty.

CANADA is designed to be a temporary thing til such time as you learn and get your affairs in order.

BTW: Common law is derived from disagreements and disputes between private individuals on the land. Goes back to Magna Carta of England and much further to original part of God's or Angel's law in ancient times, right back to creation of man [ man and woman].

nice try sbrook

fink

join:2002-08-21
Toronto, ON
g777, may I respectfully suggest that whatever medications you stopped taking on 2012-06-17 should be restarted as soon as possible.
Expand your moderator at work


AkFubar
Admittedly, A Teksavvy Fan

join:2005-02-28
Toronto CAN.
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to 04193189

Re: Teksavvy website = NEW spy agency for Google & NSA

said by 04193189:

BTW: Common law is derived from disagreements and disputes between private individuals on the land. Goes back to Magna Carta of England and much further to original part of God's or Angel's law in ancient times, right back to creation of man [ man and woman].

nice try sbrook

BTW: That reminds me. Did Adam and Eve have belly buttons???
--
If my online experience is enhanced, why are my speeds throttled?? BHell... A Public Futility.


sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:13
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·WIND Mobile
reply to 04193189
Canada (and although a corporation may exist called Canada, that is a different matter) is a State. A State is that territory over which the particular body politic exercises sovereignty.

Now our predecessors created a self governing state back in the 1860s granting themselves on the basis of many things, including common ancestry, common defense against the United States of America, sovereignty over the land we know as Canada. The peoples of the time in the provinces and colonies gave their bodies politic that right and so it continued.

Whilst we may as individuals hold property in the state, the state claims sovereignty and has reserved the right to create laws amongst other things to maintain societal and economic and international relationship order for the bodies politic. That means that our forefathers have relinquished the right of individual decision on such matters to the body politic on the basis of societal good. This is a process which has been in place for thousands of years in various states of the world. Sometimes it doesn't work and for a multitude of reasons, such as the fall of the Roman Empire, or the fall of the Soviet Union and other Eastern European countries. But in every case, society has agreed to recreate new states in their place on a similar basis.

As individuals, we therefore have no rights to opt out of the societal states created by our forefathers, but we do have the right in Canada to protest for the change and we can do that through the ballot box. Although it's interesting to note that all of the bodies politic that have sought to form our governments continue with the same system instead of changing to one of individual rights such as you are suggesting.

What you are suggesting (individuals opting out of Canada) is simple anarchistic dogma. Such anarchy would mean we wouldn't be in this position ... companies wouldn't exist because they rely on co-operation that won't happen if all that we are looking out for is ourselves.

I reiterate, your reading of the constitution is highly suspect.


nitzguy
Premium
join:2002-07-11
Sudbury, ON

1 edit
reply to Anon
I didn't realize that we were using the Wikipedia definition for territorial waters....that's all I wanted to say.....you had me until that "chink" in the armor so to speak....

But thank you for the laugh


TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON
kudos:5
Ood on the loo, actually makes more sense. HONEST!


Thane_Bitter
Inquire within
Premium
join:2005-01-20
reply to 04193189
Oh joy, a self-proclaimed "Freemen on the land".

By visiting that website you have given consent, therefore your disjointed arguments and flawed logic are completely null.

04193189

join:2012-06-18
Kitchener, ON
reply to sbrook
If you would mention your argument to any history or law professor you would be laughed at for your simplistic view.

Canada on the land can NOT exist without the explicit permission of a treaty with Natives. You and everyone should look them up as they are all there for anyone to read in Canadian Archives.
Try to find the Jesuit Priest that weaseled in the original deals between Natives, settlers, the British and the French.

Canada has broken each and every treaty it has ever made. Therefore it has become a fraudulent, thieving, lying entity. This is why millions are directing their descent at Canadian government.
See: »rabble.ca/issues/education

A "state" is nothing but an "estate", a private body of land which someone put a claim to. It does not mean it's been ratified or seeded. Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia have not been seeded and are still not part of Canada lawfully. Rest of provinces are operating unlawfully as they have broken every treaty on the books. Or maybe most people have missed all the complaints, disputes and lawsuits from Natives over time?
Go see »rabble.ca , Censored News = »bsnorrell.blogspot.ca/ and 1000's of others on the subject.

And, one can not lay claim to more land than they can use for their and their immediate family's survival ... usually a quarter section of fertile land with good water and humus per individual, and up to full section of land per family. Anything else is unlawful according to original laws of man.
Any business or operation that is lager than a quarter section of land per owner is unlawful and can be disbanded, evicted off the land and made to pay for damages, if any.

Large estates created by British Empire as it spread throughout this planet are a fraud .. and as many have been taken back by the local indigenous men and women. Some of which are India, Palestine, China, Australia, Russia, New Zealand etc. Anywhere where USA has an army base is an illegal and unlawful takeover of indigenous land as USA is acting on behalf of British Empire via money and arms.

The only lawful estates are those in private hands .. mostly called farmers today and especially those owned by Natives, and only those that do not poison or mistreat the land. Most estates in so called North and South America are unlawful as they have displaced the indigenous and native tribes.
Anyone can be a Sovereign as long as they meet certain requirements .. maybe you'd like to post these facts for everyone here and from actual documents.

There is also a Supreme court decision that says, one or anyone has the right not to be governed. Look it up and present if for everyone here
There are over 6 Million men and women that are Sovereigns within borders of Canada [between the seas]. The numbers are rising by the minute.

Most companies are providing a service, therefore they are servants and nothing but servants. So any owner can and should hold their feet to the fire if they do not provide a service to owner's satisfaction.

BTW: stepping out of Canada is not anarchy or any such thing. It is claiming or reclaiming your inherent rights as a man or a woman.

Your statement of, "I reiterate, your reading of the constitution is highly suspect." is mute as even the Supreme Court of Canada has already proved you wrong. Go fight with them if you don't like it.

04193189

join:2012-06-18
Kitchener, ON
reply to nitzguy
if you have a better one than let's see it
Expand your moderator at work

04193189

join:2012-06-18
Kitchener, ON
reply to Thane_Bitter

Re: Teksavvy website = NEW spy agency for Google & NSA

NOT a "freeman on the land" ,, not even close.

I did not give consent to any such thing by visiting a website as it's not first thing posted at the start of website ... if the page loads at all with all that code garbage, java script, picture garbage ... on my 486 laptop [which i use for testing websites, as many network analysts do]

no agreement, no accept button to press, no deal .. therefore Teksavvy is fully liable


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
said by 04193189:

on my 486 laptop [which i use for testing websites, as many network analysts do]

Nope. Not one single real network analyst out there is using a 486 laptop to test websites. There is absolutely nothing that you can accomplish on one that can't be accomplished better on a modern laptop.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org

04193189

join:2012-06-18
Kitchener, ON
it's great for testing load speeds and code / core code step by step
modern laptops take many things for granted and many times skip code that's highly relevant .. great way to pick up on errors, bugs etc.
some, more like most, solid tools don 't work on new systems
and, a security audit can only be done with all types of systems and all OS's

rollaster

join:2008-06-17
reply to 04193189
said by 04193189:

NOT a "freeman on the land" ,, not even close.

I did not give consent to any such thing by visiting a website as it's not first thing posted at the start of website ... if the page loads at all with all that code garbage, java script, picture garbage ... on my 486 laptop [which i use for testing websites, as many network analysts do]

no agreement, no accept button to press, no deal .. therefore Teksavvy is fully liable

I know where those words come from and can you please examine at what you actually write. Your concerned with google/nsa spying on you causing monetary loss or something else. What next your going to impose a fee schedule of $1,000,000 everytime this happens?

What is teksavvy actually liable for? First off I think its common sense to say that the internet is govt property all the DNS servers, fiber, everything layed out so I can communicate with you is govt property. The only thing that might not be is your personal computer. In addition all ISP's in the entire world are govt corporations so why would you even be on the internet knowing that everything on the internet is govt owned by civil law?

Teksavvy a corporation cannot assume any liability unless they break Canada's civil law or common law; breaking into and destroying your computer. In addition seeing that its a corporation of Canada if your looking for damages your looking at the wrong corporation to seek relief from b/c the individual who owns the estate of Canada that being the Queen aka the sovereign and she is the one at fault.

If you want to continue this tom foolery with no backings I suggest you write up a notice to her majesty seeking relief against such persons or corporations under her control, oh and don't forget to get it signed by a notary republic.

And for anyone who asks based on my prior post I do not follow freeman on the land b/c what they fail to examine all evidence, kind of like this guy. There's a lot of BS stuff out there, lots of that so called conspiracy stuff which I do follow is fear mongering. It really is simple examine all the evidence, hide your emotions, come to a logical conclusion based upon the evidence, and go with your gut. Not what some guy claims is right and most importantly get facts.

Facts is something written or some evidence that is not theory. Therefore upon giving evidence it is factual b/c that information forms a binding upon two parties; unless there is an emotional reason as to why not.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to 04193189
said by 04193189:

it's great for testing load speeds and code / core code step by step
modern laptops take many things for granted and many times skip code that's highly relevant .. great way to pick up on errors, bugs etc.
some, more like most, solid tools don 't work on new systems
and, a security audit can only be done with all types of systems and all OS's

Nope. No security audit done today involves 486 laptops. Modern laptops don't "take things for granted and many times skip code". 100% guaranteed you will never find a professional use a 486 laptop in a real security audit. There is not one single relevant software tool that only runs on a 486 laptop.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org

04193189

join:2012-06-18
Kitchener, ON
reply to rollaster
OK, i'm going to cut through everything you said up to this point with one statement. Teksavvy has not answered my letter and all the points mentioned in any comprehensive way.

This says, according to their own Canadian laws, that i'm right. No comprehensive rebuttal means they agree with what i've said.
I can walk into any courtroom and get a decision favorable to me/us.
This simple.

04193189

join:2012-06-18
Kitchener, ON
reply to Guspaz
well then maybe you should check the original core Unix code that runs this Internet, load times for each app, diags used for such etc.
your loss if you don't


nitzguy
Premium
join:2002-07-11
Sudbury, ON
reply to Guspaz
said by Guspaz:

said by 04193189:

on my 486 laptop [which i use for testing websites, as many network analysts do]

Nope. Not one single real network analyst out there is using a 486 laptop to test websites. There is absolutely nothing that you can accomplish on one that can't be accomplished better on a modern laptop.

I wouldn't call a 486 a laptop....I'd call it a luggable PC lol...those things were HEAVY back in the day...Windows 3.1, 35 minute battery life (maybe the battery on the one I had needed to be replaced)....good times.

Anywho, bedtime for me, Rant on my good citizen of Planet Earth!!! Rant On!!!


rogersmogers

@start.ca
reply to 04193189
said by 04193189:

on my 486 laptop [which i use for testing websites, as many network analysts do]

no agreement, no accept button to press, no deal .. therefore Teksavvy is fully liable

I know of NO network analysts who does testing on a 486. Network Analysts are the people who always want the newest toys not the oldest. I call bunk on this posting and your entire thread.

Also by using a website you already gave consent. There does not need to be an accept button.

04193189

join:2012-06-18
Kitchener, ON
if you know of none then maybe a good idea to expand your network of people.

"Also by using a website you already gave consent." .. what consent? can you explain this to me plz.
where is the agreement, contract or signature?
just by looking at someone's front yard you agree to their land and house rules?
just by looking at a cop you agree to be his/her puppy? .. uuu scary, i'm shaking in my boots