March 20 2006
Rogers Cablevision Debate Taping

JCT: Gone are the days of live call-in programs. Now they
can edit everything. And of course, just like in the
Brantford Rogers debates where Phuhrer Philp banned my
diskette button with all party buttons but also banned my
one and prop of apparel, my engineer's hard-hat. Same deal
in the Ottawa debate. Being non-live, they could just insist
on taking it away or not start the program. And it was only
one hour.

Opening Statement:
Chair: And now John Turmel.
Turmel: Hello, I'm known as John The Engineer and usually I
wear a white hard-hat that says "The Engineer" for the past
25 years but they banned the hat. Just Rogers making
politics more boring.
You've heard me talk about interest-free money in most of my
last elections and in 2000, I was invited to give the speech
on banking at the Millennium Assembly. Then Argentina used
interest-free currencies to pop out of debt just in January,
and Hugo Chavez in Venezuela is setting up social currencies
there. So it seems social currencies are spreading all
around the world except Canada where the two engineers who
invented it live.
I'll talk about that more but right now, it's about
marijuana and the government wants to spend a lot of money
chasing grow-ops: cops and gardeners, their big issue. Well,
back in 2003, I went on the Hill with 3 keys of marijuana to
prove the law was dead, I got arrested facing a life
sentence with a supply of over 3 Kilograms and even though
it made the Taipei Times and around the world, the Citizen,
the Sun and Le Droit all killed the story. Well, I was
convicted, I'm being sentenced on the day before the
election so if I'm not around on election day, you'll know
where to find me. Thanks a lot.

Q1: Dump and recycling funding:
Turmel: Recycling costs and coming up with the money is the
problem. If we had enough money, we could pay people to sort
their garbage and sell it to us. So, talking about
underfunding will be my constant harp. Interest-free
financing through computer programming is available. You
just have to do a search on-line, google for "social
currency" and you'll find out how it's done in other
countries.

Q2: Health funding:
Turmel: Well, everybody says they want more funding for
health and I'm the only one who says where I'm going to get
it from. I can reprogram the Bank of Canada's computer to
offer us that re-funding. And we don't need more hospitals,
we don't need more doctors, we need less sick people...
Chair: Okay John. That's it.

JCT: I was a bit stunned when he stopped me after 15
seconds. I was supposed to get 30. So I let out an "Ooommph"
like he knocked the wind out of my sails. I'm told the
audience viewing it in the anterooom felt it too.

Q3: Family Farm funding:
Turmel: Well, everyone said they support family farms, no
one is against it. And the question is: how? If they go
borrow money at the Royal Bank, they've got to pay it back
with interest because they have depositors. But if they
could go get a loan at the Bank of Canada, who have no
depositors, they could get it without interest and after
that, all payments go against principle, and everybody gets
out of debt, no matter how slowly you pay. So interest-free
loans at the Bank of Canada solves all the farmers'
problems.

Q4: Education funding:
Turmel: We can try to cope with underfunding or we can try
to solve it. So because I can go to the Bank of Canada and
reprogram the computer to finance the teachers' paychecks,
interest-free, I don't have that problem. So, yes, I would
let the provincial governments borrow money interest-free
from the Bank of Canada to pay their teachers a decent wage
and I wouldn't have all the problems all the other
candidates who don't have access to the Bank of Canada's
computer would have.

Q4: Student funding:
Turmel: Student loans were the first taste of interest-free
credit I ever had. I got my engineering degree through a
student loan at Carleton. And I think that all students
ought to be able to have student loans, interest-free, at
the Bank of Canada, like I did, not at the Bank of Canada.
So it takes a reprogramming of the Bank of Canada's computer
to allow people to log on, open up an account, makes loans,
pay off their interest-bearing mort-gages and have an
interest-free debt that they can eventually pay down.  And
there's nobody else on this stage who knows how to reprogram
the Bank of Canada's computer except John The Engineer.

Closing Statement:
Turmel: Well, interest-free loans, you'll have to search out
yourselves. How the Bank of Canada could be used to do that.
But right now, my favorite topic is getting rid of the
prohibition against marijuana because they want to spend
money chasing gardeners and I think we have better things to
do than playing cops and gardeners.
Back in 2003, I made the Government drop the charges against
4000 people, in one shot. I made them admit that the law
died in 2001 until 2003. Now, my name is not in the story
but I did it. And, the same thing with the story about
Ottawa's most notorious home-boy being busted on Parliament
Hill with 7 pounds of marijuana, how do you figure the
Citizen, the Sun, and Le Droit decided they were going to
kill that story. Not cover the trial, not cover the
conviction, not cover the sentencing on the 29th of March.
So something is going on that's big if the media have to
kill a story this big. So if you want to have some
information about how to fight back, and get ready for
marijuana prohibition battles, go to the internet, search
out John The Engineer, I'll show you how to fight any
marijuana charges you have and that's one way we're going to
make it difficult on them by making it expensive to convict
us. And I'll be the most expensive convictee yet.

STITTSVILLE-GOULBURN DEBATE
Stittsville meeting

JCT: During her answer, Tory Lisa MacLeod attacked former
Ottawa Police Chief Brian Ford: There's a candidate on this
stage who has come out in favor of legal marijuana and
prostitution. I acted like she meant me and stood up to take
a bow. After Chief Ford resonded that he did not favor legal
drugs but also did not favor criminal records for kids
smoking up, I responded:

Opening statement:
Turmel: I first ran in Nepean-Carleton in 1980 against Bob
Mitchell. I met Bob at Ottawa Cable when they were banning
me from the debate and I crashed it and they were starting
to take me away by calling the police when Bob yelled at
them "Let him stay," and they backed off and I got to
participate and Ottawa Cablevision was democratic ever
since.

Now, why would I have gotten into politics. I had the most
notorious reputation as an Ottawa home-boy from Carleton. I
was Teaching Assistant of the Mathematics of Gambling course
and I was trying to legalise gambling and I kept getting
busted, running raids. They used to joke that my cell at the
police station had a revolving door. And I ran for
Parliament in '79 to legalize gambling.

And then people started asking me about inflation,
unemployment, and I said "Wow, how come the poker chips in
my casino never inflate and the government's chips lose
value year after year, what's going on? I did an analysis,
published it on-line, it's there, you can find it, proving
interest causes inflation, and they tell us interest fights
inflation, the big lie Economics. So I kept running in
election after election and that's when I started putting on
the white hard-hat because an independent candidate doesn't
have much of a chance the machines with armadas of cars and
sheople and voters to carry to the polls and therefore, I
wanted to make sure that if they were going to laugh, that
they went home knowing that they laughed at an engineer who
was trying to save them. And someday, I'd probably be
laughing right back. Well, that day is now.

You haven't heard about me in the last few years, there's
been a kind of a press black-out but in 2000, well, you
heard of me talking about interest-free money for 25 years,
run the banking system like poker chips, ha ha ha, well,
right now, social currency, unquote, is spreading around the
world and in 2000, I got invited to the United Nations,
remember the Millennium Assembly, there's Chretien,
(pointing at the New York Earth Times), there's Clinton. I
was there too. See, there's Clinton, there's the sheik, and
there's me, just above Clinton. (laughter)

And I did the speech on banking and I said: you've got to
run banking like poker chips where people's time is their
collateral, as well as their houses. And they passed it,
Millennium Declaration Resolution C6 to Governments. So
someday, you'll have an interest-free bank account at the
U.N. Thanks to me. You ain't got it yet but other countries
are getting it.

After 61 elections, you have to ask yourselves: doesn't this
guy get tired of losing? Headlines like "Legendary loser"
"Fails Again." Yeah, I know, I know, for a professional
gambler, that looks bad. But in the meantime, I'm on the
same page as Her Majesty The Queen in the Guinness Book of
Records under Royalty and Government. Her, longest reigning
Queen, me, most elections contested. It didn't go to my head
because in the American version, they put me on the same
page as the world's biggest bagel. (laughter)

Nevertheless,
I'll pay my tax for army and police to handle strife;
I'll pay my tax for doctors, nurses who protect my life;
I'll pay my tax for all engaged repairing road and sewer;
I'll pay my tax for social servants helping out the poor;
I'll even pay my tax for bureaucrats with no regret;
But I object to paying tax for interest on debt.
As long as I get people's time at useful toil, no problem,
but taxing me for money's time will always make me boil.

So that's why I ran in election after election until in
1984, I financed some software called LETS which is nothing
but computerized poker chips where people leave their marker
for work, and it's spread around the world. So in 2000, I
got invited to the UN. They passed that resolution.

Well, remember 4 years ago, Argentina went broke? Last
month, they paid off all their IMF/World Bank loans. You
didn't hear about it, the media didn't report it. Wow!
Miracle!  Well, Hugo Chavez in Venezuela just announced he
was starting up social currencies in January, two months
ago. So it's spreading around the world, Latin America is
using their own interest-free local currencies to supplant
the missing underfunding we're all suffering from,
engineered by two Canadians, seems to be installed in Canada
last.

I'm here to explain that all the underfunding problems
later, how LETS and interest-free social currencies can
solve the problem. But back to the drug story. People who
dare call a herb like marijuana a drug, when they stick
their kids with Prozac, Ritalin, and they've got medicine
cabinets full of pills, hey, I'm saying it's time to get
them off the chemicals and get them on the herbals.
(laughter) And how dare they link the herbal with the
chemical! It's an insult. (laughter and applause) More to
say about that at the end.

Q1. Prostitution:
Turmel: You can synthesize my political program in: Cops out
of gambling, sex, drugs and rock&roll and interest-free
loans at the Bank of Canada. Then I can retired. I can call
that Heaven. But, yes, it's unfortunate with these poor
women forced into such circumstances by their financial
need. Give them an interest-free credit card. Then, shy and
ugly people got a right to get laid. (laughter) And the God
I worship doesn't care I worship doesn't care who tickles
whose tootoo, when.  (laughter)

Q2: What about an unwanted dump:
Using Ontario provincial bonds like they used Argentinian
Provincial bonds, I'd pay to do recycling right.

Q3: Candidates who live in riding:
I first moved to Nepean in 1979, I'd just been busted for
gambling in Ottawa (laughter) and Chief Gus Wersh had told
Mayor Ben Franklin when I tried to rent the Nepean
Sportsplex to run a game, that they wouldn't bust me if I
ran games in my own home, because it was a sleazy charge, so
I moved to Nepean and they left me alone. But after a few
years I moved back to Ottawa and then, I got busted in '88
so I moved back to Nepean in 1989 (laughter), in my basement
again, then I moved out and went to Gatineau, Hull, and ran
a game on downtown main street and got busted in '91. I got
the game back in Nepean in '92 and '93, then the big bust on
St. Laurent Blvd. Then I had to go to Atlantic City to play
poker because there was no more gambling in Ottawa. And so
I've been away for about 10 years but regardless, I'm a
resident of the community of Ontario and that's what givesme
the right to be here running. So let's just hope it comes
down someday to the person with the best brain and not the
best fleet of cars.

Q4: Health Care funding:
Turmel: And why only 2 MRIs? Why not as
many as we need? Not enough magic paper. And because of
mankind's shortage of magic paper, things that we could do,
we could build, we have the men, materials and tools, we're
just lacking the money. Just like during the war. During the
Great Depression, you had men sitting in front of their
trees with their hammers and chain saws, couldn't build
housing. You had ants, they've got no money but they were
all working. Then all of a sudden, the war came along and
they had an industrial boom delivering bombs for free to the
Germans when the year before, they couldn't deliver food for
free to themselves. How come? Not enough magic paper. Well,
these guys don't understand how the magic paper system
works. It's got them fooled into thinking there's got to be
a shortage of magic paper to make it work. And I'm saying:
no, it doesn't have to be magic paper, it can be a receipt
for collateral like a poker chip worth something all the
time. And all we've got to do is not give a monopoly to the
banks to issue these receipts, to issue them yourselves, and
you don't have to pay interest to those guys. So I'm always
going to be talking about underfunding problems. I'm always
going to be talking about coming up with enough magic paper.

Q5: Ontario Dairy Producers funding:
JCT: A farmer asked what we'd do to help farmers. The others
all wanted to, were in favor of, stressed the need to, the
wish to, the work they'd do to, help support farmers. I
asked the guy if an interest-free loan at the Bank of Canada
with all payments going against the principle would solve
their problems so they wouldn't need any help. The guy
didn't answer so I said: Duhhhh? So he reacted and admitted:
Yes. "Thank you." An interest-free loan at the Bank of
Canada would help farmers enough they don't need hand-outs.

Freedom Party candidate Jurgen Vollrath agreed with John
Turmel that farmers should have interest-free loans at the
Bank of Canada. Nice to know some of them, if not the
Freedom Party leader, have their banking right.

Q6: Credit transfers:
JCT: I pointed out it was nothing but a reorganization to
hide cuts. I pointed out how marijuana would get them off
their pills. As for education, if all kids had their own
Bank of Canada credit lines, they could afford to pay for
their own schooling and teachers when they come on line in
later years. Give kids credit lines like the interest-free
loans like the student loans I got and make them pay them
back like I did. Let the kids pay for their own educations,
not me.

Q7: Who brings the best talents and resources to the table
as our representatives?

Turmel: I bring to the table a program that is not in
English, but it's in code, called LETS. To solve
underfunding. If you do a search for "anti poverty engineer"
you get me. The LETS software has been called an anti-
poverty system in Britain, an "economic life-boat" in
Australia, where people use it to cover the gap where they
don't have enough federal currency. Also, I'm known as the
Great Canadian Gambler, I'm the best limit Holdem player in
the world, which also makes it funny that the world's best
Holdem player would also be the world's biggest political
loser. What's going on here? Again, it comes back to the
marijuana, the recent U. of Saskatchewan study showed that
marijuana regenerates the neurons in the brain, marijuana
regrows brain cells, which explains why I'm so sharp and
they're so dull. (big laughter and applause)

Closing statement:
Turmel: Well, speaking of the fringe, whenever the media
interview the little guys, they always go: why do you bother
to run? you're not going to win, doesn't it bother you being
called fringe? And I like to look at them and say: it ain't
so bad when they call you the King of the Fringe.
Now the reason I'm into the marijuana story, here's the fast
serious stuff. Terry Parker, the epileptic, proved that it
stops epileptic seizures and the court decided that it is a
violation of his rights to prohibit his anti-seizure
medicine. But they suspended their decision for a year so
the government could give the sick access, then they could
ban everybody else from getting it. So one year later, they
issue the access regulations which the doctors scream "we're
not signing" so it didn't work. They didn't save the law in
time so I said the law became invalid and died. Well, I went
to court with Parker and sure enough, they had to admit
that, yes, the law had died in 2001, but in 2003 said "we're
fixing it and the law is alive again; but for 2 years, the
law is dead." And they said: all the 4000 pending charges
that are left of possession of marijuana, okay, we're going
to stay all 4000 charges. I said: what about the 100,000
people you convicted while it was not alive? Aren't you
going to erase those convictions? They said "ssshhhhh."
That's the Parker Scandal. They admit that the law was dead,
they drop all the remaining charges, but they leave
everybody nailed improperly with their criminal records. So
they can't go to the States and their lives are ruined.
Then, a year later, the Krieger decision in Alberta, a
judge said: I agree that sick guys have the right to grow
medicine if the government isn't providing good stuff, I
strike down the law. And the government went to appeal, they
got an interim order pending appeal staying the decision,
then after the appeal was over, they said: oh, the interim
order is still alive so the law ain't dead. And I'm saying:
It is dead and there have been another 150,000 busted since
then.
So they were going to bring back the legislation for real in
2003 May 15. So I went on the Hill with 7 pounds of
marijuana, I'm up for a life sentence after a jury trial,
and I got arrested by the RCMP and charged with possession
for the purpose of trafficking to the Prime Minister, and to
the Supreme Court, (laughter) I was going to give each of
them a pound. So anyway, it did pay off, they said: okay,
you're right, possession was not valid at the time you were
busted, but you were charged with possession for the
purpose. So therefore, we're still going through with your
trial. So I was convicted last week and I'll be sentenced on
the 29th. (laughter) What's interesting is, no kidding, the
day before the election... (laughter) well, in '91, you know
I had the conviction with the casino and I got 4000 votes
while I was running for Regional Chair from behind bars.
This could be my second time to be getting votes from behind
bars. I'm not looking forward to it on the 29th but the
point is: 3000 epileptics, 4 a day, have croaked because
they didn't have access to their medicine. Sick people all
over the country are dying for this herb and the prohibition
of this herb is a genocide and I'm going to do my best to
kill the law, get the drunks off alcohol, off the bottle,
get them on the herbal, (laughter) get the pill-poppers off
the   chemicals, get them on the herbal. And, at the same
time, hopefully, not go to jail for a long long time. So if
I'm not around to celebrate at the victory party of whoever
wins, like I usually do, you know where I am because, when I
got busted, (pointing at picture smoking in front of Peace
Tower) this went to the Taipei Times, I could see this in
China, but the Ottawa Citizen, the Sun and Le Droit, they
all killed the story, which is why you don't know about
Ottawa's most notorious home-boy facing a life-sentence
because the newspapers didn't print the story. It's a big
story, I got 4000 people off the hook, 100,000 more to go
that should be off the hook, and they're going to try to
stop me on the 29th, maybe.
---

Date: Friday, March 31, 2006
Ottawa Citizen
Tories' MacLeod posts easy victory in Nepean-Carleton
by-election

Chris Lackner and Vito Pilieci, The Ottawa Citizen; with
files from The Canadian Press

Beats former police chief; cites law and order, taxes, child
care as priorities

Capitalizing on frustration with the Liberal party, Lisa
MacLeod grabbed an easy victory yesterday in the provincial
Nepean-Carleton by-election. Ms. MacLeod, 31, held on to the
riding for the Conservatives, beating out her nearest
competitor, Liberal Brian Ford, by a margin of 7,854 votes.

The byelection became necessary when former Conservative MPP
John Baird contested and won the riding's federal seat in
January. During a fiery acceptance speech in front of about
125 supporters, Ms. MacLeod repeatedly said the Liberals
were out of touch with the values of the people of Nepean-
Carleton. "Dalton McGuinty may be able to ban pit bulls, but
he won't be able to ban Lisa MacLeod," she said. "Unlike the
premier's bills, you'll be able to tell the difference. Pit
bulls don't wear lipstick. "You have chosen my energy and
experience over the beleaguered McGuinty government and the
status quo option," Ms. MacLeod said.

Ms. MacLeod's campaign focused on health care, law and order
and gun control -- three areas that helped elect Stephen
Harper's federal Conservatives. Last night, she listed her
own top priorities, citing law and order, lower taxes, child
care and opposition to the Carp Road landfill expansion. She
also said she was proud to be the first female politician to
be elected to the provincial legislature for the riding.

Unofficial results showed Ms. MacLeod received 17,311 votes
for 57.6 per cent of the total, Mr. Ford 9,457 or 31.4 per
cent, New Democrat Laurel Gibbons 2,489 or 8.3 per cent and
the Green party's Peter Tretter 634 for 2.1 per cent. John
Turmel won 112 votes as an independent candidate while
Jurgen Vollrath took 74 votes for the Freedom party.

Ms. MacLeod attributed part of her strong win to the
alienation of rural voters who comprise a large portion of
the riding. "I will go to Queen's Park as an advocate of the
family farm," she said.

Ms. MacLeod's victory party turned Greenfield's Pub in
Barrhaven into a Tory shrine: six large posters of a smiling
leader John Tory, multiple photos of Ms. MacLeod and a
stream of blue and white balloons. Mr. Ford, a 36-year
veteran with the Ottawa police -- including seven years as
chief -- had name recognition on his side. But it wasn't
enough to overcome the Tory surge.

Mr. Ford, arriving to join fellow Liberals at the Bells
Corners sports bar Local Heroes, said he was "very proud" of
the effort of his campaign team. "We fought a great fight
and I have never been prouder," he said, adding that he was
inspired by his experience with the process. "We live in a
great country and I am proud to have been part of it," said
the 63-year-old Mr. Ford. "We didn't win, but it's not
because we didn't try. We fought hard and we fought clean,"
he said, suggesting that he might run again. "You never
know."

NDP candidate Ms. Gibbons said she was happy with the
party's increased share of the vote and that she would
likely run again in the upcoming provincial general election
in October 2007. Ms. Gibbons said she would try to hold Ms.
MacLeod to account on her pledge to help autistic children.
Ms. Gibbons' six-year-old son is autistic and she ran in the
campaign partially to fight against what she considers
unfair age limits on the pre-school autistic program.



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: Well, my getting busted didn't make the Ottawa Citizen
but my getting sentenced finally did. And it got picked up
by CP which accounts for two reports:

>Date: Mar 30 2006
>Marijuana advocate loses case, hit with fine
>http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=98bf5790-35eb-4d32-893c-\
85bb08021471&k=20760
Marijuana advocate loses case, hit with fine

Turmel is independent candidate in today's Nepean-Carleton vote

John Turmel tried to deliver three kilograms of marijuana to
former prime minister Jean Chretien.

http://a123.g.akamai.net/f/123/12465/1d/media.canada.com/idl/otct/20060330/27750\
3-92786.jpg
Photograph by : The Canadian Press

Tony Lofaro, The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Thursday, March 30, 2006

TL: John Turmel fought Canada's marijuana law in court
yesterday, and the law won.

Mr. Turmel, a professional gambler and a medicinal marijuana
advocate, was fined $1,000, given three years probation and
told to perform 100 hours of community service after he was
found guilty of a 2003 offence of possessing marijuana for
the purpose of trafficking.

The independent candidate in today's Nepean-Carleton
byelection said he plans to appeal Ontario Court Justice
Paul Belanger's decision. He said the reason he went to
Parliament Hill to deliver three kilograms of marijuana to
former prime minister Jean Chretien in 2003 was to make a
political statement about the need to decriminalize the
country's marijuana laws.

JCT: Actually, it was about the need to not "re-criminalize"
what I was saying had been struck down.

TL: But yesterday, the flamboyant poker player and perennial
political candidate was just happy he wasn't headed to jail.
"If I lose (the appeal), I'll have to pay, but I didn't want
to go to jail, that's what worried me," the 55-year-old said
after being found guilty of the charge.

Mr. Turmel, who lives in Brantford, Ont., across the street
from a casino where he plays poker, said the judge believed
his motive in 2003 was just to make a political statement
about Canada's marijuana laws. "I just wanted to prove that
the possession law was still dead and I was proven right.
They dropped the (possession) charges against 4,000 people,
so I stopped the courts from enforcing an invalid law," he
said.

Federal Crown attorney Allyson Ratsoy said Mr. Turmel's case
took nearly three years to come to trial because he brought
a series of motions through the courts challenging the
constitutionally of the marijuana laws. "I'd call him an
activist, not a nuisance. He has every right to voice his
protests, but just not in the manner that he did."
B) The Ottawa Citizen 2006

JCT: I'm sure Allyson's happy to have her Turmel adventure
over with. Though I'll bet she'll appreciate it more some
day.
Here's another version in the Brantford Expositor:

Brantford Expositor
March 30 2006
OTTAWA (CP)
CP: Three years ago, John Turmel dared the Crown to
prosecute him for carrying three kilograms of marijuana to
Parliament Hill and lighting a joint in protest of what he
said were unjust prosecutions.

That prosecution came to an end Wednesday with Turmel being
sentenced to three years probation, and fined $1000 for
possession for the purpose of trafficking. Turmel - the
Guinness Record holder for most elections contested, and
lost, 60 - was also ordered to perform 100 hours of
community service by Justice Paul Belanger.

On May 14 2003, Turmel faxed a manifesto to a variety of
Crown attorneys declaring his intention to bring a bag full
of pot to Parliament Hill and share it with various
politicians. RCMP officers were waiting for him when he
arrived.

JCT: Actually, Parliament Hill Security suggested I take my
marijuana and go home. Only when I refused and laid a bag at
the doorstep of the House of Commons did they call in the
RCMP. I could have, a la Robin Hood, escaped to puff up
anoter day.

CP: Turmel said Wednesday he was trying to expose the fact
people were being convicted for possession of drugs when the
law governing possession had been declared of no force and
effect by an Ontario Superior Court Judge.

JCT: By three judges of Ontario's highest court.

In a written decision issued March 10, Belanger ruled the
decision did not extend to possession for the purpose of
trafficking.



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

>From:  w_b_r...@... - view profile
>Date:  Sat, Mar 25 2006 4:23 pm
>Email:   w_b_r...@...
>Groups:   alt.fan.john-turmel, alt.conspiracy

Chester wrote:
>> Do us all a favour John.  Find the*real* guy who did
>> the Eddie Melo hit and sick him on that stupid
>> asshole who floods this newsgroup with posts that
>> say that you drink your piss!
>> We're a little tired of that!

JCT: For some conditions, the novelty doesn't wear off.

---
WR: Perhaps you will define "this newsgroup."  It is John
Turmel who has flooded numerous newsgroups with literally
thousands of irrelevant postings over the years, rendering
them useless as meaningful discussion forums.

JCT: Because my posts are there, others can't discuss?

WR: Apparently you are in favor of legalizing pot. It is
John Turmel who has associated pot with the drinking of
piss, haven't you noticed? These are John Turmel's own
words.  Deal with it:-

JCT: I think that after having it repeated so often, Chester
has noticed it. No need to repeat it again.

"By the way, he thinks he's shaming me while I think
he's helping spread a message many people will
eventually thank me for. I couldn't ask for a better
plug to bring this natural miraculous healer to
everyone's attention, even if from a demented
lunatic. I'm so not ashamed that I even pee a mug
full and chug it in the DVD put out last year at
http://www.turmelmovie.com so it's not as if I'm not
happy to get the message out."

JCT: Like I said, for some, the novelty just can't wear off.
If you search for turmel at Google Groups sorted on date,
you get:
John Turmel drinks his own piss.
can.politics - Mar 28, 6:46 am by w_b_r...@... - 2 messages

pattern for a court response to a Turmel filing?
can.legal - Mar 26, 11:37 pm by Kelly Bert Manning - 1 message

John Turmel drinks his own piss.
can.politics - Mar 22, 10:34 pm by w_b_r...@... - 2 messages

TURMEL:: 60 Minutes gives time to pot activist Marc Emery
tor.general - Mar 21, 7:28 pm by Irish.Eyes - 92 messages -

TURMEL: Richard Kay continues to support Bill Ryan
alt.fan.john-turmel - Mar 19, 3:25 pm by John Turmel - 1 message -

60 Minutes gives time to pot activist Marc Emery
ca.general - Mar 12, 11:33 am by klunk - 67 messages - 14 authors

Turmel pouts about google presentation order Re: TURMEL: Bill Ryan ...
alt.fan.john-turmel - Mar 11, 8:20 pm Kelly Bert Manning - 3 messages

John Turmel drinks his own piss.
sci.engr - Mar 10, 10:12 am by w_b_r...@... - 2 messages

John Turmel drinks his own piss.
can.politics - Mar 6, 5:13 pm by w_b_r...@... - 2 messages

John Turmel drinks his own piss.
can.politics - Mar 4, 6:55 pm Another Republican Coward - 7 messages

John Turmel drinks his own piss.
sci.engr - Mar 3, 11:19 am by w_b_r...@... - 4 messages

Can the John Turmel rant be removed
alt.fan.john-turmel - Mar 2, 2:47 pm by malw...@... -

JCT: Now take a look at Ryan's contribution to the most prestigious
technical USENET newsgroup, sci.engr:

Articles range from 58351 to 58409:  sci.engr
58351. TURMEL: Facing jail always unnerving                       John Turmel
58352. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58353. UPDATE:  Download FE-Sizer Version 3.0 - Lates|"news.consolidated.net"
58354. TURMEL: Bill Ryan continues making pissy posts in debate   John Turmel
58355. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58356. Turmel pouts about google presentation order Re: TU|Kelly Bert Manning
58357. TURMEL: House of Commons Bust Conviction and sentencing    John Turmel
58358. Most Powerful Diesel in the World!                              Ablang
58359. Nine new quarterly, peer-reviewed journal ti|"macleod.roddy@googlemail
58360. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58361. TURMEL: "Prince of Pot" no "Rot" at Paquette's Webpage!    John Turmel
58362. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58363. TURMEL: 60 Minutes gives time to pot activist Marc Emery   John Turmel
58364. Re: TURMEL: "Prince of Pot" no "Rot" at Paquette's Webpa|Duncan Patton
58365. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58366. Re: Most Powerful Diesel in the World!                     Greg Locock
58367. TURMEL: Court Clutz Young in Hamilton Kamikaze Case        John Turmel
58368. TURMEL: #B Court Clutz Young in Hamilton Kamikaze Case     John Turmel
58369. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58370. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58371. Call for Papers (extended): IAENG International |imecs__2006@...
58372. TURMEL: Ryan continues pissy abuse, Kay & Yacub approve    John Turmel
58373. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                w_b_ryan@...
58374. TURMEL: Judge Belanger Parliament Bust conviction transcri|John Turmel
58375. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58376. TURMEL: Chris Goodwin on CH-TV minus Alan Young            John Turmel
58377. Call for Papers (extended): IAENG International W|imecs_2006@...
58378. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58379. TURMEL: Ryan still vandalising Google Groups search functi|John Turmel
58380. TURMEL: Guinness Record 61st Nepean-Carleton Byelection    John Turmel
58381. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58382. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58383. How do you normalize to 101 time points?         "jpopovich@..."
58384. calculation software for designers                   brybolt@...
58385. Analytical Heat Conduction Problem                    "Paul Skoczylas"
58386. TURMEL: Richard Kay continues to support Bill Ryan         John Turmel
58387. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58388. TURMEL: Ontario Press Council demands Expositor's Judd ans|John Turmel
58389. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58390. Re: Ink                                                   Peter Lowrie
58391. Re: Ink                                               "Rheilly Phoull"
58392. Call for Papers (extended): IAENG International |imecs__2006@...
58393. TURMEL: Ottawa Rogers Debate Tuesdays 9pm Wednesdays noon  John Turmel
58394. TURMEL: Supreme Court Registrar may dismiss Parker's appea|John Turmel
58395. TURMEL: Expositor editor David Judd has no answer for Pres|John Turmel
58396. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58397. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58398. Call for Papers (extended): IAENG International W|imecs_2006@...
58399. TURMEL: Crown Factum in Mar 28 Big Six appeal              John Turmel
58400. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58401. Maintenance plan of Slip Ring Induction Motors               "creator"
58402. TURMEL: Pierre Drouin Factum (he got his medical exemption|John Turmel
58403. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58404. TOC, current reality tree etc -                       SabDor@...
58405. Re: TURMEL: Pierre Drouin Factum (he got his medical exempti|"Chester"
58406. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58407. TURMEL: New Factums at mpforms ready.                      John Turmel
58408. John Turmel drinks his own piss.                    w_b_ryan@...
58409. CPU: 64-bit vs 32-bit DualCore                                    madz

JCT: 20 contributions from William B Ryan out of 60, a full one third
of all posts in sci.engr are from someone fixated on urine. And some
will blame me for bringing the mad dog into the group. Bill Ryan's
contributions to world engineering. Har har har.




--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/mpforms.htm now as the
updated forms to prohibit marijuana charges for the next
legions of warriors on their 3-stepper to the top.

Every Motion to Prohibit comes first at the Superior Court
level. Not to worry about quash. Then to appeal. Then to the
top. Six of us are going to be in Ontario's highest court on
Mar 28. It's taken years for most, months for me who started
in December, as I finally caught up.

The online "fight your charges kit" have been changed. I
now include a factum judges keep asking for.

Yet, lots has changed since I last edited my "fight the
charges kit." I've usually ended up creating new forms for
each new self-defender without keeping up to date on the
public forms.

MedPot Forms at mpforms
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/mpforms.htm

What's important now is to hit them at their weak spot, not
necessarily at the spots they are defending. When the
unconscionable is indefensible, silence is the usual tactic.

So I don't want some newbie to have to become an expert in
all the case law of the timeline at
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/timeline.htm. Look how
Noreen Ever's case got bogged down in minutiae and it'll
cost her a fortune to print appeal books. Maybe one reason
the Crown doesn't mind preparing our Ontario appeals is that
they're so small! Max Cornelssen's Appeal Book would include
half an inch contributed by him and four inches by the
Crown.

No, KISS is called for, as usual. How can I make the attack,
defence, even simpler, even more focused?

It always comes down to Krieger at the Supreme Court. The
Crown have always found ways to duck it. The "Acton
invalidation is still stayed" argument just died with Scott
Couper testimony and it's time to capitalize on that.
Because it was in the Frankel argument to the top: "the law
is dead in Alberta if it's lifted," now ends with "oops, it
lapsed and we forgot to get a stay."

Just like they screwed up and kept busting people while the
Parker invalidation had taken effect two years earlier, they
did not get a new stay and kept busting people while Acton's
Krieger invalidation had taken effect 3 years earlier. The
Krieger scandal has more bogus busts than the Parker scandal
did.

Isn't that the crux of our case, higher than the Ontario
Hitzig travesty, pure and simple like Parker I.

Again, I don't even need to deal with the Hitzig
resurrection of s.4(1) when we're talking of the Krieger
invalidation of s.7(1) cultivation section raised by
Appellants Pierre Drouin and Real Martin.

Though we were all charged with 5(2), possession for the
purpose of trafficking, the Nielsens also had 4(1)
possession charge but Pierre and Real also had 7(1)
cultivation so they are true cultivation challenges linked
right to Krieger. And Pierre now has an exemption so like
Krieger without an exemption, he did have his rights
violated by the  system. Har har har har. And with his
exemption to fall back on, he's still on attack and angry
about what they put him through. And he's our best link to
the Krieger decision s.7(1). After that, we claim
invalidation by implication of s.4(1) and then 5(2) when it
become a mere thought crime once possession and cultivation
are legal.

It would always be harder for non-cultivators to explain the
link to Krieger. Too many implications perhaps. But Pierre
is completely analogous to Krieger and they only reason he
suffered being put through the ringer is because Judge
Doherty, Goudge and Simmons told the Crwon to bust everyone
and let the sick prove it to the courts. Pierre's there to
say that busting everyone and letting the sick off kills
some sick and causes pain to others and these judges who
have ordered the forces of justice to arrest all including
the sick have blood on their hands.

And Section 4 by Frankel's "by implication too."

When Justices Wittmann, Costigan and LoVecchio dismissed the
government's appeal, the Crown did have the right ask the
court to be appealed from for a stay in their decision. Of
course, Krieger's lawyer, Mr. Adriano Iovinelli, must have
realized that the Crown was properly due a stay of execution
pending the Supreme Court application for leave to appeal
and would ask for it. Maybe he could be bluffed out of
asking?

So Iovinelli jumped up and asked the court to lift the stay
which had just lapsed with the end of the official court
function and the opposing lawyer took the bait and opposed
lifting the Alberta Court of Appeal stay that was no longer
there instead of seeking to put in place a Supreme Court of
Canada stay. He wanted to present evidence of how the
government had complied with Acton's obligations. The Court
of Appeal declined to entertain the motion to lift the
lapsed interim stay and made sure to mention in their final
decision that no hearing with evidence would be necessary
since Acton J. had not obliged the Governmemnt to do
anything, she only struck down s.7(1).

So before Couper could ask for a real stay, Iovinelli jumped
up pretending that the old stay was still alive and asked to
have it removed. Couper should have pointed out it was up to
the Crown to ask for a new one out of the SCC Act but Couper
played along and opposed Iovinelli with is evidence for
compliance and never obtained a stay pursuant to the Supreme
Court of Canada Act to stop Acton J.'s ruling from taking
effect, officially by the highest court of a province which
is stare decisis to lower courts of Canada. Of course, any
lower court can always say: bull, I disagree and will let it
go to my own Appeal Court. I'm trying to get Ontario Courts
to do this right now.

To cover for that boner, Frankel tells the SCC that the
O'Leary interim order is still alive and that canard is
repeated by all Crown Attorney's who should know better all
down the line. And judges too. Until Couper's testimony
admits it was linked to the appellant's status and he was
going to ask for the stay out of the Supreme Court of Canada
but then settled for Iovinelli saying he's happy to pretend
the interim OCA stay was still alive too.

I have no doubt that given Justice Acton's invalidation of
the cultivation prohibition in s.7(1) of the CDSA (and by
implication possession in s.4(1)) was going to take effect
upon the Appellate Court becoming functus officio, the Crown
would have been trusted to get it filed when Couper asked
the court appealed from for such a stay under the Supreme
Court Act which was not functus officio.

Should be quite an argument later today. But, the latest
Factum is now ready on the mpforms.htm page or at
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/prscom.txt




--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: Co-appellant in our demands for prohibition of charges
under a still repealed penal statute Pierre Drouin can't
lose. His doctor has satisfied Health Canada pharmacists
that Pierre Drouin has legitimate medical need, had it when
he was busted, perfectly analogous to Krieger.

But before Pierre argued his health in defence, he argued
the S.7(1) cultivation prohibition was invalidated in
Krieger for him and was not resurrected by the Hitzig
Court's resurrection of Section 4(1). Pierre is a pure
Section 7(1) challenge. No Section 4(1) Hitzig stuff to
confuse the court! It could be the pin we've all been
waiting for.

It's the chance to attack the Hitzig Court of Appeal
decision that says the cops should keep busting everyone and
the judges will get out their stethoscopes to perform their
medical examinations of the accused so that the sick be
"simply exempted" from convictions. Here's their first case.
Do all of Canada's sick really have to go through being
busted to then prove their medical need to doctor-wannabe
judges? They're victims of the Hitzig decision.

                 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
BETWEEN:
                    HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
                                       Applicant / Respondent

                           - and -
Court File Nos.: C42999
     DOUGLAS NIELSEN, LAUREL NIELSEN and DANIELLE NIELSEN
                                                   Appellants

                          - and -
C44684
                        REAL MARTIN                 Appellant

                           - and -
C44683
                       PIERRE DROUIN                Appellant

                           - and -
  C44587 & C44588
                       JOHN C. TURMEL               Appellant


                   FACTUM OF PIERRE DROUIN


PART I - STATEMENT:

1. Appellant Pierre Drouin is appealing the December 15 2005
decision of Superior Court Justice Nadeau in Cochrane
refusing to prohibit a charge under Section s.7(1) of the
Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.


PART II - OVERVIEW:

2. The motion involved questions of law alone and Appellant
adopts the arguments in the Factum of John Turmel that
Nadeau J. erred in not prohibiting the prosecution of the
charges on the grounds that the Krieger decision invalidated
the CDSA prohibitions against cultivation of marijuana in
section 7(1) and, by implication, possession in section 4(1)
on December 4 2003 and no new prohibition has been enacted
by Parliament since S.2(2) of the Interpretation Act says it
has been deemed to be repealed.

3. The motion further involves the question of whether the
courts should be deciding whether those accused have
sufficient medical need to be found not guilty.


PART III - FACTS:

4. In the Hitzig decision, the court ruled:
"[170] First, if we do not suspend our order, there will
immediately be a constitutionally valid exemption in effect
and the marihuana prohibition in s. 4 of the CDSA will
immediately be constitutionally valid and of full force and
effect. In R. v. Parker, supra, this court declared the
prohibition invalid as of July 31, 2001 if by that date the
Government had not enacted a constitutionally sound medical
exemption. Our decision in this case confirms that it did
not do so. Hence the marihuana prohibition in s. 4 has been
of no force or effect since July 31, 2001. Since the July 8,
2003 regulation did not address the eligibility deficiency,
that alone could not have cured the problem.
However, our order has the result of constitutionalizing the
medical exemption created by the Government. As a result,
the marihuana prohibition in s. 4 is no longer inconsistent
with the provisions of the Constitution. Although Parliament
may subsequently choose to change it, that prohibition is
now no longer invalid, but is of full force and effect.
Those who establish medical need are simply exempted from
it. This consequence removes the cloud of uncertainty from
the marihuana prohibition in s. 4 of the CDSA - a cloud
which we were told in argument has created very considerable
confusion for courts and law enforcement agencies alike. A
suspension of our remedy would simply have continued that
undesirable uncertainty for a further period of time."

5. Appellant Pierre Drouin was charged with cultivating
marijuana for his personal medical need pursuant to section
7(1) of the CDSA and has established a legitimate need by
recently qualifying for a Health Canada exemption.


PART IV - ISSUE:

6. Is prosecuting the sick and then exempting them if they
prove legitimate medical need to the court a violation of
their right to life?

7. When the court said: "Those who establish medical need
are simply exempted from it," it fails to take into account
the ordeal those who have medical need are put through
before they are "simply exempted from it." Appellant, like
Krieger, always had a verifiable medically-recommended need
and after being busted and dragged through the justice
system for 3 years, the Hitzig Court of Appeal says the
Appellant is now "simply exempted." No apology for
interference with his prescription?

8. Appellant says that busting all the sick like the healthy
and then letting the sick be exempted continues to abuse the
right to life of the sick.

9. Appellant argued the prohibition had been invalidated by
the Krieger decision which was based on medical need.
Regardless the decision on the Krieger invalidation, this
appellant's medical need is analogous to Krieger's and my
deprivation of my medicine was as much a violation of my
right to life as Krieger's was while my need of exemption
was just as medically-recommended as Krieger's was.

10. A system which charges the sick and then lets them off
after a physical examination by doctor-wannabe judges is an
offence to the right to life of the sick.



PART V -- ORDER SOUGHT:

16. Appellant seeks an Order declaring that the Krieger
invalidation of the prohibition in Section 7(1), and by
implication in Section 4(1), of the CDSA took effect on
December 4 2002.



Dated at ____________ on March ________  2006






-------------------------------
Pierre Drouin, Appellant
Box 5
Jogues ON P0L 1R0
Tel/fax: 705-362-7502

TO: The Registrar of the Ontario Court of Appeal
Kelly Low, Crown Attorney's office

SCHEDULE A - LIST OF AUTHORITIES
None
SCHEDULE B - RELEVANT LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
None

JCT: So Pierre had a legitimate medical need and he suffered
losing his best medicine and the financial and physical
burden of many court appearances because the Hitzig court
said busting the sick and then letting them off is the right
way to protect their rights. So he wasn't lying when he said
he was sick enough to qualify to the Health Canada people
who originally needed more proof from his doctor backing up
his opinion. And everyone with medical need who gets busted
simply applies, gets their exemption and makes the
prosecution a complete waste of the Ministry of Justice's
resources.

Remember, there's another cadre of cases coming at them.
Derek Francisco in Lindsay and possibly Nick Minardi in
Windsor and who knows how many more people are going to file
and try to explain to the court how Krieger at the Supreme
Court is the highest card in the deck.

Best of all, Pierre knows his Krieger stuff inside out. And
his case is analogous. So even if they don't accept Krieger
Court of Appeal, they should still rule the same as the
Krieger Court of Appeal since Pierre's medical need is as
proven as Krieger's was!!! See his transcript again:
http://yahoogroups.com/group/medpot/message/1938



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: On March 28, 2006, Doug, Laurie, Danielle Nielsen,
Pierre Drouin, Real Martin and I will be in the Ontario
Court of Appeal challenging refusals to prohibit marijuana
charges on the grounds the prohibitions have been invalid
since the Parker and Krieger struck them down.

Our Factum was published and now it's the Crown's turn.
Thanks to Laurie for scanning in the text for us.

Court File No. C42999, C44684,
C44683, C44587
C44588
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
BETWEEN:
       HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
             Applicant (Respondent on Appeal)
and
DOUGLAS NIELSEN, LAUREL NIELSEN and DANIELLE NIELSEN and
REAL MARTIN and
PIERRE DROUIN and
JOHN C. TURMEL
Respondent
(Appellant on Appeal)

CONSOLIDATED FACTUM OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA ON THE
MOTION TO QUASH THE APPEALS
Steve Coroza
Counsel for the Attorney General of Canada
Department of Justice
201 County Court Blvd. Suite 600 Brampton, Ontario L6W 4L2
Tel: (905) 454-2424 Fax: (905)454-2168

CR: PART I- RESPONDENT'S STATEMENT AS TO FACTS

OVERVIEW OF THE APPEALS AND THE MOTION

1. The history of these cases affords excellent examples of
why courts generally restrict the use of prerogative
remedies to circumstances where no other remedy is
available1.
1 Gover and Ramraj, The Criminal Lawyers' Guide to
Extraordinary Remedies (Canada Law Book, 2000) at p. 12;
A.G. (Queb.) v. Cohen (1979), 46 C.C.C. (2d) 473 at 476
(S.C.C.); R. v. Jones (1974), 2 O.R. (2d) 741 at 751
(Ont.C.A.); R. v. Anson and the Queen (1983) 4 C.C.C. (3d)
119 at 124-131

JCT: Generally, sure, but in a case of genocide with
thousands of lives at stake, perhaps not so generally.

CR: 2. Each of the appellants has been charged with offences
involving marihuana under the Controlled Drugs and
Substances Act ("CDSA"). The appellants argue that they are
all charged with offences that are not known to law. As a
result, each of them have brought applications to obtain
injunctions against prosecution in the Superior Court of
Justice disguised in the form of prohibition or certiorari
in a continuing effort to evade a trial on the merits. Each
of the applications has been dismissed.

JCT: Evade a trial on the merits? Evade a trial until the
existence of the law is established, more like it.

CR: 3. On appeal to this court, the appellants request the
same remedy in the Superior Court of Justice. In reality,
each of these appeals is an attempt to do an end-run around
the rule against interlocutory criminal appeals. None of
these appeals raise jurisdictional issues that warrant the
intervention of this court. The appeals should be quashed.

JCT: Do the courts have jurisdiction to enforce and court-
created penal statute? No.

CR: 4. This factum is filed in support of the Attorney
General of Canada's motion to quash the appeals and in the
alternative, serves as a response to the appeals filed
before this court.

HISTORY OF THE PROCEEDINGS
5. The status of the charges for each appellant is
summarized below for this court's convenience2:
2 See Affidavit of Julianne Kelloway, dated March 15, 2006.

Douglas Nielsen, Laurel Nielsen (C42999)
Possession of marihuana for the purpose of trafficking and
possession of marihuana. June 2, 2004.
Festeryga J. (Superior Court of Justice) January 14,
2005.Application for prohibition
March 20, 2006 (Ontario Court of Justice)
May 26, 2006 (Superior Court of Justice)

Real Martin (C44684)
Production of marihuana3. June 18,2003.
3 Martin is also charged with three offences under the
Criminal Code of Canada (s. 86(1) x 1, and :-5(5)(b)x2)
Nadeau J. (S.C.J.)
Application for prohibition
May 26, 2006 (Superior Court of Justice)

Pierre Drouin (C44683)
Production of marihuana and possession of marihuana for the
purpose of trafficking4. June 11, 2003.
4 Drouin is also charged with five counts of possessing a
prohibited weapon under the Criminal Code of Canada (s.
91(2) x 5)
Nadeau J. (S.C.J.)
Application for prohibition

John Turmel (C44587 C44588)
Convicted of charge on March 10, 2006 by Justice Belanger
(Ontario Court of Justice). Sentencing scheduled for March
29,2006.5
5 This effectively renders the appeals involving Turmel
(C44587 and C44588) moot.
Possession for the purpose of trafficking marihuana May 14,
2003.
MacLeod J. (S.C.J.)
Application for prohibition and certiorari.

A) Douglas Nielsen, Laurel Nielsen and Danielle Nielsen
(C42999)
6. On June 21, 2004, the appellants were charged under
section 5(2) and section 4(1) of the CDSA. No trial date has
been scheduled. On July 22, 2004 the appellants brought a
motion before Justice Edward of the Ontario Court of Justice
requesting that the charges against them be dismissed
because they were not known in law. The application was
dismissed on September 14, 2004. On September 29, 2004, the
appellants requested that Justice Edward reconsider his
position. This motion was also dismissed. On January 14,
2005, the appellants brought an application for prohibition
before Justice Festeryga of the Superior Court of Justice,
Brantford. After hearing submissions, the application was
dismissed without prejudice to the applicants to appeal
Justice Edward's ruling "at the appropriate time"6.
6 Affidavit of Julianne Kelloway. dated March 15, 2006,
Exhibit A.

B) Real Martin (C44684)
7. On June 18, 2003 the appellant, was charged under section
7(1) of the CDSA and section 86(1) and section 145(5)(b) of
the Criminal Code of Canada (2 counts)7.
7 The appellant, Real Martin has been committed for trial. A
charge under section 4( 1) of the Controlled Drugs and
Substances Act was withdrawn on December 5, 2005.
The appellant brought an application for prohibition before
Justice Nadeau of the Superior Court of Justice on June 24,
2005. On December 5, 2005, Justice Nadeau dismissed the
Appellant's application for prohibition. The appellant's
return date to the Superior Court of Justice is May 26,
2006. No trial date has been scheduled for this matter.

C) Pierre Drouin (C44683)
8. On June 11, 2003 the appellant was charged under section
7(1) and section 5(2) of the CDS A and section 91(2) of the
Criminal Code of Canada (5 counts)8.
8 The appellant, Pierre Drouin has been committed for trial.

On June 24, 2005, the appellant also brought an application
for prohibition before Justice Nadeau of the Superior Court
of Justice, Cochrane9.
9 Pierre Drouin and Real Martin had requested that both
applications be heard at the same time.

On December 5, 2005, Justice Nadeau also dismissed the
Appellant's application for prohibition. The appellant's
return date to the Superior Court of Justice is May 26,
2006. No trial date has been scheduled for this matter.

D) John Turmel (C44587 and C44588)
9. On May 14, 2003 the appellant was charged under section
5(2) of the CDSA10.
10 Although the amount of marijuana in his possession was
alleged to be over 3 kilograms, the Crown proceeded on a
charge of possession under 3 kilograms, pursuant to sections
5(2) and 5(4) of the CDSA.10
CR: 10 Although the offence under section 5(4) of the CDSA
is an indictable offence, it falls within the category of
"absolute jurisdiction" offences established in section
553.(c)(xi) of the Criminal Code. That is, the trial of an
offence under section 5(4) of the CDSA is within the
absolute jurisdiction of a provincial court judge and the
accused person does not have the options of electing to have
a preliminary hearing and/or electing to be tried by a judge
of the superior court.

JCT: Although... means they did something special...

CR: On March 10, 2006, the appellant was convicted by
Justice Belanger of the Ontario Court of Justice. A
sentencing hearing has been scheduled for March 29, 2006.

10. Since the date of his arrest, the appellant has brought
9 applications in either the Ontario Court of Justice or the
Superior Court of Justice asking the courts to quash the
information as it disclosed no offence known to law11 or to
have the word "not" deleted from the sentence "not exceeding
3 kgs" in the information12.
11 This court has already dismissed an appeal from one of
the decisions of the Superior Court of Justice. See R. v.
Turmel (2003), 177 C.C.C. (3d) 533 (Ont.C.A.)
12 The appellant's position is that since he possessed over
3 kilograms in his possession the offence that he committed
is not in the absolute jurisdiction of the Ontario Court of
Justice and that he is entitled to a trial by jury.

The appeals before the court (C44587 and C44588) are from
the decisions of Justice MacLeod of the Superior Court of
Justice dismissing the appellant's applications for
prohibition and certiorari on November 28, 2005.

PART III: ISSUES AND THE LAW

A) Prohibition Should Not Be Granted Where There Is Another
Remedy

JCT: Now while people are dying should we go the slow route.

CR: 11. Criminal trial proceedings should not be disrupted
by applications for prerogative relief. As noted by
Finlayson J.A. in R. v. Tucker13, "preroragative remedies
for criminal charges will not ordinarily lie where an appeal
is available." In R. v. Jones14, Schroder J.A. adopted the
following limitation on the use of prohibition: "Like all
other extraordinary remedies, prohibition is granted only in
cases where the usual and ordinary forms of remedy are
insufficient to afford redress. And it is a principle of
universal application, and one which lies at the very
foundation of the law of prohibition, that the jurisdiction
is strictly confined to cases where no other remedy exists,
and it is always a sufficient reason for withholding the
writ that the party aggrieved has another and complete
remedy at law." (emphasis added)
13 (1992) 9 O.K. (3d) 291 at 302 (Ont.C.A.)
14 (1974), 2 O.R. 741 at 751 (Ont.C.A.)

12. In R. v. Jones, supra, at page 751, Schroeder J.A.
explained why courts must restrict the use of prerogative
remedies to circumstances where no other remedy is
available:
"If a disappointed litigant were at liberty to obtain an
order of mandamus or prohibition whenever he was
dissatisfied with an order or ruling made by a Court in the
course of the trial, this would constitute a disastrous
interference with the orderly administration of justice and
the wheels of justice would soon grind to a halt. (emphasis
added). Moreover, the burden of expense which such a course
of procedure would impose upon the State is not to be left
out of consideration."

JCT: Of course, this is not in the course of the trial but
before the trial, actually trying to save time.

CR: 13. The appellants may raise all of the issues set out
in their Notices of Appeal with the judge at trial15.
15 In fact, two of the appellants, Nielsen (C42999) and
Turmel (C44587 and C44588) should be bringing their motions
to quash the informations charging them with possession of
marihuana for the purpose of trafficking in the Ontario
Court of Justice.

JCT: The slow route.

CR: The appellants motions to quash were brought in the
Superior Court of Justice. The Superior Court of Justice is
the wrong forum because the offence in respect of which the
appellants were charged is within the absolute jurisdiction
of the Ontario Court of Justice.

JCT: There is no jurisdiction to prosecute an invalid
statute.

CR: (See section 553(c)(xi) and section 601(1) and 601(10)
of the Criminal Code of Canada.  Having brought their
motions in the wrong forum, they have no right to appeal to
this court.

If the appellants are convicted at trial, they may then
raise these issues on appeal.

JCT: The slow route with 4 epileptics dying every day.

CR: The appellants rights are protected by the normal trial
and appeal process set out by the Criminal Code of Canada.
It is desirable that the trial take place before resort is
made to higher courts to ensure that the issue is not merely
an academic one. It may well be the case that the
prosecution is unable to prove the offences beyond a
reasonable doubt.

JCT: It is desirable to end it before trial.

CR: B) The Appeals Do Not Involve A Significant
Jurisdictional Issue

14. A common theme advanced by the appellants is that the
Superior Court of Justice should have prohibited their
charges from proceeding because they are not charged with an
offence known to law. Putting aside the more obvious flaws
from the proposed defence,16 prohibition is not available to
restrain a judge from proceeding with an information which
does not disclose a criminal offence or is defective in
substance or form, unless the statute under which the
information was laid is ultra vires.

JCT: Bingo.

CR: 16 The response to the submission that the appellants
are not charged with offences known to law is set out below.

The issue as to whether or not an information discloses an
offence is a matter for the trial judge17.
17 R. v. Toronto Magistrates Ex Parte Bassett [1967] 1
C.C.C. 251 at 254 (Ont.C.A.) and R. v. Dnieper, Ex Parte
Rijimax Motors Ltd. (1969), 9 D.L.R. (3d) 661 at 664-5
(Ont.H.C.); affd, (1969), 9 D.L.R. (3d) 668 (Ont.C.A.)

JCT: Except in the extraordinary circumstance where people
are dying.

CR: 15. The issues raised by the appellants on these appeals
are not jurisdictional in nature,

JCT: I thought proceeding under an invalid statute is a
jurisdictional argument.

CR: and consequently, there was no basis for a prohibition
order. It is well established that trial judge's rulings
which involve the following do not raise jurisdictional
issues:
i) the interpretation of offence provisions in a statute;
and
ii) the constitutionality of legislation.
Clearly, if jurisdiction is not lost when a judge actually
makes a decision with respect to these matters, jurisdiction
could not be lost, where there is the potential for a
decision which could impact on these issues18.
18 R. v. Gilberg, [1975] 2 \V.\V.R. 171 at 175 (Alta.C.A.);
R. v. Mills (1986), 26 C.C.C. (3d) 481 at 496 (S.C.C.), and
R. v Jones, supra

C) Assuming That The Appeals Touch On A Jurisdiction
Question, A Prohibition Order Is Still Not Available In The
Cases At Bar

16. Simply because a matter comes before this court by way
of prohibition does not necessarily take it out of the
general rule that the court will not hear interlocutory
appeals in criminal matters. Courts will generally refuse to
issue a prohibition order unless the harmful consequences to
the applicant clearly outweigh the delay and fragmentation
of the trial resulting from the prohibition application.

JCT: Denying Pierre and me our medicine has harmful
consequences.

CR: The decision whether or not to issue a prohibition order
is a discretionary matter and prohibition is only to be
granted in a substantially clear case of want of
jurisdiction or that there are very special or exceptional
circumstances.19
19 Re Anson and the Queen, supra and R. v. Tucker, supra and
see Re Corbeil and The Queen (1986), 27 C.C.C. (3d) 245
(Ont. C.A.); R. v. Arcand, [2004] O.J. No. 5017 (Ont. C.A.)
(Q.L.); R. v. Johnson (1991), 3 O.K. (3d) 49 (Ont. C.A.).

JCT: These are about as extraordinary as circumstances can
be. Genocide warrants quick action.

CR: 17. In particular, the extraordinary remedies of
mandamus and prohibition are not granted if some other
remedy is available. Assuming that the issues in the cases
at bar have a jurisdictional aspect to them, the appellants
may raise these issues at trial, and thereafter, if
necessary on appeal. There are no "very special" or
"exceptional" circumstances warranting the disruption of the
criminal trials in these cases.

JCT: 4 dead epileptics a day seems exceptional enough.

CR: D) Production Of Marihuana And Possession Of Marihuana
For The Purpose Of Trafficking Are Offences Known To Law

18. The appeals are all premised on the argument that all
prohibitions against marijuana in the CDSA have been "struck
down" or "are of no force and effect". The appellants argue
that when the Ontario Court of Appeal in Parker declared to
be invalid the reference to marihuana in Schedule II for the
purposes of the offence of possession of marihuana in
section 4 of the CDSA, that Order effectively deleted
marihuana from Schedule II to the CDSA, thereby removing
marihuana from the list of controlled substances under the
CDSA. The appellants argue that as a result the offences of
trafficking in marihuana and production of marihuana had
been "repealed".

19. The appellants argument, however, is grounded on a
fundamental misunderstanding of the effect of this court's
order in Parker20.
20 R. v. Parker (2000), 146 C.C.C.(3d) 193 (Ont.C.A.

In Parker, this court determined that the prohibition
against simple possession of marihuana in the CDSA was
overly broad,

JCT: They used the word "invalid." The Hitzig Court
misquoted them and the Crown quotes the misquote.

CR: as the legislative scheme failed to provide an exemption
for medical use. The constitutional validity of the offence
of possession of marihuana for the purpose of trafficking,
in section 5(2) of the CDS A, and production of marihuana,
in section 7 of the CDSA, was not before this court in
Parker.21
21 See R. v. Krieger, [2000] A.J. No. 1683 (Alta.Q.B.); affd
[2002] A.J. No. 1644.(Alta. C.A.); leave to appeal to the
Supreme Court of Canada denied. In this case the court
upheld the constitutional validity of the offence of
possession of cannabis marihuana for the purpose of
trafficking. (The Alberta Court of Appeal ordered a new
trial on the trafficking charge, but only with respect to
the trial judge's charge to the jury regarding the defence
of necessity. The validity of the trafficking offence was
not overturned.)

20. This court has already found that these types of
arguments are misconceived and explained that its
declaration of invalidity did not delete marihuana as a
controlled substance in Schedule II22.
22 " See Turmel, supra

JCT: No need to change the legislation struck down by Parker
and Krieger, the judges will remember which written laws are
good and which are not. Har har har har. Strict
interpretation of statutes by the judiciary.

CR: As this court has aptly noted, pursuant to s.52(l) of
the Constitution Act, the court only had jurisdiction to
declare the prohibition against marihuana unconstitutional
to the extent of its inconsistency with the Constitution.
Since the constitutional issue in Parker was restricted to
possession of marihuana for medical purposes,

JCT: Not true. It was declared in valid. Not a word about
medical in the Order.

CR: and not for the purposes of trafficking, the declaration
of invalidity was restricted to the prohibition against
marihuana only in relation to the offence of simple
possession under the CDSA.

JCT: No mention of "simple" possession. Just that s.4(1)
prohibition was invalid. Incredible how Crown's just make up
their own interpretations and try to fly them.

CR: "All other offence provisions in respect of marihuana,
such as production of marihuana, trafficking in marihuana,
possession of marihuana for the purpose of trafficking, and
importing of marihuana, remained in full force and effect."

21. Since there has never been a declaration of invalidity
in respect of the offence of possession for the purpose of
trafficking or production of marihuana in Ontario, these
offences existed at the time the appellants were alleged to
have committed their crimes.23.
23 A useful summary of the positions of the appellants and
the response to these misplaced arguments is set out by
Justice Belanger in the Ontario Court of Justice, who,
recently, convicted the appellant Turmel (C44587 and C44588)
on March 10, 2006. See Affidavit of Julianne Kelloway. dated
March 15, 2006, Exhibit L.

JCT: All he did was cite the Crown's case word for word.

CR: E) Conclusion

22. The appeals should be quashed. Courts have been
traditionally loathe to give prerogative relief prior to the
end of a trial because it leads to unnecessary fragmentation
of the trial process and undue delay.

JCT: But not in these cases where motions were brought
before trial and not to fragment trial.

CR: Having regard to the procedural history of the cases
before the court, these prosecutions have developed into
textbook situations that underlie the policy reason for
limiting prerogative remedies. If these appeals are not
quashed there is every reason to believe that these cases
will continue to be mired in interlocutory appeal and other
procedural wrangling.

JCT: Doesn't matter. I'm going to flood the Court of Appeal
with them anyway.

CR: 23. In the event that the appeals are not quashed, they
should be dismissed as being without merit. It is clear that
the proposed grounds of appeal are premised on the
remarkable proposition that at present there is no
prohibition against the possession, production and
possession of marihuana for the purposes of trafficking.

JCT: Remarkable because it's true.

CR: 24. Prohibition and certiorari are discretionary
remedies. In considering the appeals on their merits, the
issue as to whether any of the decisions appealed from ought
to be reversed, the court must take into account the
discretionary nature of the relief sought below by each of
the appellants. A review of the decisions by each of the
judges in the Superior Court dismissing the appellant's
application for prohibition or certiorari demonstrate that
none of the judges have committed misdirection or rendered a
decision 'so wrong as to amount to an injustice".24
24 R. v. Carosella(1997). 112 C.C.C. (3d) 289 (S.C.C.) atp.
309

PART IV: ORDER REQUESTED

24. The applicant/respondent requests that the appeals be
quashed or dismissed.

ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.

DATED at the City of Toronto, this 21st day of March, 2006.
Steve Coroza
Counsel for the Applicant (Respondent on Appeal)

SCHEDULE "A" - AUTHORITIES TO BE CITED
Cover and Ramraj, The Criminal Lawyers' Guide to
Extraordinary Remedies (Canada Law Book, 2000) at p. 12

A.G. (Queb.) v. Cohen (1979), 46 C.C.C. (2d) 473 at 476
(S.C.C.)

R. v. Jones (1974), 2 O.R. (2d) 741 at 751 (Ont.C.A.)

R. v. Anson and the Queen (1983) 4 C.C.C. (3d) 119 at 124-
131

R. v. Turmel (2003), 177 C.C.C. (3d) 533 (Ont.C.A.)

R. v. Tucker (1992), 9 O.R. (3d) 291 at 302 (Ont.C.A.)

R. v. Toronto Magistrates Ex Parte Bassett [1967] 1 C.C.C.
251 at 254 (Ont.C.A.)

R. v. Dnieper, Ex Parte Rijimax Motors Ltd. (1969), 9 D.L.R.
(3d) 661 at 664-5 (Ont.H.C.); affd,(1969), 9 D.L.R. (3d) 668
(Ont.C.A.)

R. v. Gilberg, [1975] 2 W.W.R. 171 at 175 (Alta.C.A.)

R. v. Mills (1986), 26 C.C.C. (3d) 481 at 496 (S.C.C.), and
R. v Jones, supra

Re Corbeil and The Queen (1986), 27 C.C.C. (3d) 245 (Ont.
C.A.)

R. v. Arcand, [2004] O.J. No. 5017 (Ont. C.A.) (Q.L.)

R. v. Johnson (1991), 3 O.R. (3d) 49 (Ont. C.A.).

R. v. Krieger, [2000] A.J. No. 1683 (Alta.Q.B.); aff d
[2002] A.J. No. 1644.(Alta. C.A.);

R. v. Parker (2000), 146 C.C.C.Qd) 193 (Ont.C.A.)

R. v. Carosella (1997), 112 C.C.C. (3d) 289 (S.C.C.) at p.
309

SCHEDULE "B" - RELEVANT LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS

Controlled Drugs and Substances Act
Trafficking in substance
Possession for purpose of trafficking
Punishment
Punishment in respect of specified substance
Interpretation
Interpretation
5. (1) No person shall traffic in a substance included in
Schedule I, II, III or IV or in any substance represented or
held out by that person to be such a substance.
(2) No person shall, for the purpose of trafficking, possess
a substance included in Schedule I, II, III or IV.
(3) Every person who contravenes subsection (1) or (2)
(a) subject to subsection (4), where the subject-matter of
the offence is substance included in Schedule I or II, is
guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment
for life;
(b) where the subject-matter of the offence is a substance
included in Schedule III,
(i) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, or
(ii) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary
conviction and liable to imprisonment for a term not
exceeding eighteen months; and
(c) where the subject-matter of the offence is a substance
included in Schedule IV,
(i) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, or
(ii) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary
conviction and liable to imprisonment for a term not
exceeding one year.
(4) Every person who contravenes subsection (1) or (2),
where the subject-matter of the offence is a substance
included in Schedule II in an amount that does not exceed
the amount set out for that substance in Schedule VII, is
guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment
for a term not exceeding five years less a day.
(5) For the purposes of applying subsection (3) or (4) in
respect of an offence under subsection (1), a reference to a
substance included in Schedule I, II, III or IV includes a
reference to any substance represented or held out to be a
substance included in that Schedule.
(6) For the purposes of subsection (4) and Schedule VII, the
amount of the substance means the entire amount of any
mixture or substance, or the whole of any plant, that
contains a detectable amount of the substance.
Production of substance
Punishment
7. (1) Except as authorized under the regulations, no person
shall produce a substance included in Schedule I, II, III or
IV.
(2) Every person who contravenes subsection (1)
(a) where the subject-matter of the offence is a substance
included inSchedule I or II, other than cannabis
(marihuana), is guilty of an indictable offence and liable
to imprisonment for life;
(b) where the subject-matter of the offence is cannabis
(marihuana), is guilty of an indictable offence and liable
to imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years;
(c) where the subject-matter of the offence is a substance
included in Schedule III,
(i) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, or
(ii) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary
conviction and liable to imprisonment for a term not
exceeding eighteen months; and
(d) where the subject-matter of the offence is a substance
included in Schedule IV,
(i) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, or
(ii) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary
conviction and liable to imprisonment for a term not
exceeding one year.
SCHEDULE VII
(Sections 5 and 60)
Substance Amount
2. Cannabis (marihuana) 3 kg

JCT: So it all boils down to whether thousands of dead
epileptics and more dying every day calls for extraordinary
relief. Since the Ontario Court of Appeal is responsible for
the genocide, it might be hard-pressed to take it seriously!




--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

http://www.cannabisculture.com/library/images/uploads/4619-GrantSupreme.jpg

has a picture captioned "Grant Kreiger"...
They got his name wrong!!!

And the guy on the left looks like Alan Young's narc mole
gofer Steve Bacon with his moll, Lady Dianne Bruce who
would not testify that she had been growing marijuana for
Marc Paquette causing him to lose out on his claim for the
return of the seized pot or it's equivalent cash value.

Who are the other probable narc moles in the picture?







--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

>Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:41:23 -0500
>From: info@... (Mel Sufrin)
>Subject: complaint
>To: turmel@... ("John C. Turmel")

Mr. Turmel:
The Brantford Expositor says it will not respond to your
complaint. I'll put the file over for the executive
committee meeting in mid-april which will consider whether
to recommend adjudication.
Mel Sufrin

JCT: Imagine. He refuses to answer!

If you want to read the complaint, it's titled
"Complaint about Judd lies to Ontario Press Council"

More news when it happens.




--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: You'll remember that the Crown Attorney's have written
that my application for leave to appeal the Hitzig
resurrection was dismissed by Justice Binnie. Sounds pretty
official a procedure explaining why it didn't make it to the
panel when it the most important "drug" case in marijuana
history was ready to proceed to the panel.

Now they're trying to pull another one-judge railroading of
Terry Parker's Hitzit resurrection challenge off the track.
8
Terry got a letter dated March 15 from Joanne Laniel, Head
of Registry giving Terry notice:

File Number: #31245
                IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA
         (ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO)
BETWEEN
                       Terrance Parker

                             AND
                    Her Majesty the Queen

Notice of Intention to Dismiss Application for Leave for Delay
       (Rule 64 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Canada)

TAKE NOTICE that Terrance Parker has not served and filed all
the documents required under Rule 25 of the Rules of the Supreme
Court of Canada for this application for leave within the later
of:
(a) the time set out in paragraph 58(1)(a) of the Supreme Court
Act or the time extended under subsection 59(1) of that Act and
(b) three months after the filing of a notice of application for
leave to appeal.

AND FURTHER TAKE NOTICE that the Registrar may dismiss the
application for leave to appeal as abandoned if the time for
serving and filing the materials is not extended by a judge on
motion. The applicant must serve and file the motion for an
extension of time within 20 days after the receipt of this
notice.

Dated at Ottawa this 15th day of March 2006.
Registrar

JCT: Section 58 of the SCC Act says applicants for leave to
appeal must do so within 30 days.
Section 59(1) says if it's later, they need an extension of
time from a judge.
Section 59(4) says applications for leave to appeal in forma
pauperis do not have to conform to the Section 58 deadline.

I, Marc Paquette and Terry, did apply under Section 59(4) so
we don't need extensions of time. But the Registrar
threatened to dismiss the application as abandoned if I
didn't apply for an extension and I got sucked in. Even
though I didn't need an extension, I applied which gave one
back-roomer judge the chance to refuse. And so it looks like
the aplication was dismissed by a judge.

It's not going to happen to Parker. If it's going to be
dismissed for being late, it's not going to have judge's
name attached to it like mine did. The most important case
in Canadian history is going to be dismissed by the
Registrar while it was ready to go!!! People will vomit a
lot more than they do when they hear about Justice Binnie's
railroad job on me.

Pulling a railroad job on Terry won't help them for long.
The Nielsens', Drouin's, Martin's and Turmel's latest
Krieger challenges are being heard next week and we could
have our applications for leave to appeal on time before
they can abandon Terry's for not being on time when he
didn't have to be on time. Har har har har. We're back.

And one other little piece of info is that:

PART 14
RECONSIDERATIONS AND RE-HEARINGS

Reconsideration of Application for Leave to Appeal
73. (1) There shall be no reconsideration of an application
forleave to appeal unless there are exceedingly rare
circumstances in the case that warrant consideration by the
Court.

JCT: The most important case with the greatest number of
victims in Canadian history makes it rare enough to apply.
There is a way to get Canada's biggest before 3 judges no
matter what the Registrar does.

(2) A motion for reconsideration must be served on all
parties and the original and five copies filed with the
Registrar within 30 days after the judgment on the
application for leave to appeal.
(3) The motion for reconsideration shall be bound with grey
covers and consist of the following, in the following order:
(a) a notice of motion for reconsideration in Form 47, with
any modifications that the circumstances may require;
(b) an affidavit setting out the exceedingly rare
circumstances in the case that warrant consideration by the
Court and an explanation of why the issue was not previously
raised;
(c) any new documents that the party intends to rely on; and
(d) a statement of argument not exceeding 10 pages.

(4) A motion for reconsideration that does not include an
affidavit setting out exceedingly rare circumstances as
described in paragraph 3(b) shall not be submitted to the
Court.

JCT: An easy affidavit for Canada's most important medpot
refusee to provide.

(5) A respondent may respond to a motion for reconsideration
within 10 days of its acceptance for filing by serving on
all other parties and filing with the Registrar the original
and five copies of a statement of argument not exceeding 10
pages.

Re-hearing of Application for Leave to Appeal
74. There shall be no re-hearing of an application for leave
to appeal.

JCT: This can't apply when there was never a hearing before
the decision!

Anyway, the Parker is not going to be railroaded with a
judge's signature. It's going to be railroaded by a clerk.



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: Last night, I did two debates. The first was taped at
Rogers (they don't do live anymore) which will be broadcast
on Tuesdays at 9pm and Wednesdays at Noon. The first tonight
and second tomorrow. Would anyone in the Ottawa region tape
it in case I can't.

It was one last great chance to bring attention to my House
of Common bust for possession (while possession wasn't
illegal) for the purpose of trafficking to the Prime
Minister and other government elites before I am sentenced
on the day before the March 30th election and could
disappear into the belly of the beast. And who knows when,
if ever, I get out. Especially if they refuse release
pending appeal.

The last time I was jailed in the 1991 Casino Turmel gaming
house bust in Hull-Gatineau, I was refused release pending my
appeal because Quebec Appellate Justice Mailhot who
considered me to dangerous with a deck of cards to be
released.

So you can imagine what purported trafficker to the Prime
Minister, Justice Minister, and Court Justices, might get.
Could be my last 10 minutes on the tube.


Then a went to a meeting in Stittsville-Goulburn which was
quite lively. I pointed out to the crowd how the CBC and CTV
cameramen turned off their cameras when I was speaking. CBC
and CTV reports should continue the impression the want to
create but I stole the show. Wasn't hard with UNILETS and
medpot to push to an supportive and appreciative crowd.

I'll see if I can pull off a report since, as usual, I
brought along my tape recorder.



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: In my last post titled "Complaint about Judd lies to
Ontario Press Council" I laid out the facts behind my
complaint about the misrepresentations of what I had said at
a political meeting by the Brantford Expositor's editor
David Judd and the council has just demanded their answer.
If I'm not satisfied, it goes on to a live hearing!!!

Ontario Press Council
2 Carlton Street, #1706
Toronto, ON M5B 1J3
Tel/fax: 416-340-1981/8724
Email: info@...

March 7 2006

John C. Turmel, B. Eng.,
8-37 Colborne St. E.,
Brantford ON N3T 2G3,
Tel/fax: 519-753-0645
Email: turmel@...

Dear Mr. Turmel:

Thank you for your Feb 6 letter complaining about coverage
of a Jan 6 meeting by the Brantford Expositor. It arrived
while I was on vacation.

I believe you are aware that the constitution of the Ontario
Press Council requires that a newspaper be given an
opportunity to respond to, and possibly redress, a complaint
before the council decides whether to adjudicate it.

Accordingly, a copy of the correspondence is being sent to
the Expositor. Please let me know whether its response
redresses your complaint.

Sincerely yours,
Mel Sufrin
Executive Secretary



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: I've just sent off my sixth abuse complaint about Bill
Ryan responding to every one of my posts with his "John
Turmel drinks his own piss" automated response.
Megacorporation Google doesn't seem to have anyone with a
live brain working that desk. Yet.

If you Google search at Groups for turmel sorted on date,
you'll get to see Bill Ryan's contribution. Still, if they
permit a Bill Ryan to sabotage their search results, then
they deserve to have people search elsewhere. Of course,
historians will be amused to see all these Piss posts from
Ryan. Sure will let them know who won all our d debates. You
don't see me having to vandalise his work to win my point.

And of course, Bill's he's over at the International Journal
of Community Currency Research trying to start up debates
http://yahoogroups.com/group/ijccr after I asked people to
shun him until he stops his vandalism. As far as I know,
only Richard Kay, who banned me from his econ-lets list
before it died of no interesting input, continues to join
Bill in debate.

Bill keeps commenting on the posts of others inviting them
to debate with him. Of course, there are no promises he
won't go after them when he lost his debates to me.

And, while the vandalism goes on, I'm sorry to litter these
lists with my complaints. But it's not really just about a
senile old man. It's about a megacorporate search engine
that can't prevent this kind of abuse. It sure makes Google
look bad, especially after hearing other censorship issues.



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: On March 10, 2006, after being convicted of possessing
3.3Kg of marijuana at the House of Commons on Parliament
Hill for the purpose of trafficking to the Prime Minister,
Justice Minister, Supreme Court of Canada, Superior Court of
Ontario, RCMP and Ottawa Police, with sentencing submissions
to be heard on March 29 2006, I went out and registered in
the byelection for March 30 in Nepean-Carleton, my old home
town stomping ground. Where the print media suppressed the
story of Ottawa's most notorious Carleton Graduate until
Conrad Black getting busted at the House of Commons with a
life-sentence supply of marijuana. And why there was no
Citizen, Sun, Le Droit report on the required jury trial for
when the amount of the matter is greater than 3Kg.

But first, on March 28, 2006, I'm in the Ontario Court of
Appeal with the applicants to prohibit the charges before
Belanger on the basis of Krieger (no matter how many judges
have not seen, it doesn't mean they didn't have their eyes
closed: I have not been sufficiently shown... therefore
dismissed" is the result of 90% of my cases).

Next day on March 29, 2006, Judge Belanger is sentencing me
the day after the Court of Appeal says he has jurisdiction
over me with greater than 3Kg because they put the lie of
"less than 3Kg" in my indictment. And because the Hitzig
Court ordering the ignoring, not strike down, of the
Interpretation Act has resurrected the prohibition after two
years of repeal, now deemed to be only absence.

On March 30, 2006, it could be my second election while in
jail. I was jailed during the 1991 race for Ottawa Regional
Chair and got over 4000 votes while behind bars.

I have no such illusions about an independent's hopes in the
Nepean-Carleton byelection but it sure will get people
wondering why Turmel being busted with a life-sentence
supply of cannabis wasn't reported on.

It should be one heck of a flyer to be handing out on the
days before my sentencing. Heck, there may be more than the
usual 1 or 2 observers.


--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: My last post about the transcript of Judge Belanger
decision convicting me of possession of 3.3Kg for the
purpose of trafficking to the Prime Minister, Justice
Minister, Supreme Court of Canada, Superior Court of
Ontario, RCMP and Ottawa Police has been covered over in the
Google main search engine by Bill Ryan's "pissy" response.
I've forwarded another abuse complaint to Google groups.

http://groups.google.ca/groups/abuse?hl=en&group=can.politic
s&url=http%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.ca%2Fgroup%2Fcan.politics%2
Fmsg%2F36e200329b80bb94

This is an automated bot that responds to every one of
my posts so that a search at your main page shows up
as a monotonous series of "piss" posts forcing people to
search usenet elsewhere. I've always referred people to
Google Groups for usenet turmel articles before.
Please correct this sabotage of your overview page
or I'll have to refer them to another Usenet provider.

JCT: Hope vandalisation of their search function wakes them
up.

--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

CH-TV Monday March 13 2006  5:30p

JCT: Mark Hebscher started with Pot smokers beware.
Conservative government has no plans and arrests expected to
rise just public toking was becoming more acceptable,
appears crackdown has begun. Up in Smoke owner was busted
but he was released. Controversy since 2004, Goodwin not
surprised.

On with Chris Goodwin is Joseph Ben-Ami, executive director
of the Institute for Canadian Values. And Joseph's going to
give us our values. Institute for Canadian Values, a front
from the narcs.

Hebscher: You're Daring them to arrest you?

Goodwin: Not true at all. I want freedom and equality with
coffee bean growers. Freedom like in Vancouver and Toronto.

Hebscher: With Harper, wouldn't it be best to lay low?

Goodwin: I have to take it further. The Harper crack-down is
myth. Small minority, big opposition, more perception than
reality.

Lawrence Diskin: You intend on making this a test case?

Goodwin: Trying to. Majority want legalisation. If no
parliament, have to fight in the courts.

Lawrence Diskin: Joseph, what would you say to those who say
we're a drug-consuming society, we have no choice about
regulating pot.

Ben-Ami: Important to remember that law enforcement is
provincial so not fair to pin on federal Conservatives.

JCT: The prohibition is federal, who cares who the arresters
are, it's who can call them off.

Ben-Ami: Comparing marijuana or any other narcotic to
caffeine is simply absurd. The fact is that this is a
poison...

Goodwin: That's not true.

Ben-Ami:.. that has long-term devastating health impact on
the people that use it long-term in significant quantities.

Goodwin: That's not true.

Ben-Ami: It destroys families, it destroys communities.

Goodwin: Prohibition destroys communities sir. Marijuana's
no more harmful and actually is less harmful than caffeine.
It's a non-toxic safe benign herb.

Lawrence Diskin: Wait, wait, according to the Canadian
Centre on Substance Abuse, they warn of side effects ranging
from impaired concentration, respiratory damage, depression,
paranoia, aggravation of pre-existing psychiatric symptoms.

JCT: Poor kid has professional liars on both sides and all
he can say is "that's not true." Of course that's the point.
It's reduced down to both sides calling the other "liar"
with many viewers being unable to distinguish who is telling
the truth.

Goodwin: That sounds like 1933 Reefer Madness.

Diskin: I didn't make it up, it's out of their report.

JCT: They made it up.

Goodwin: I'd love to see it but the Canadian Senate found it no
more harmful than caffeine and should be sold in an open and
regulated environment to anyone over 16 years of age. I
believe they've looked at that report and found it to be
utter nonsense.

JCT: Chris had a smug smirk as he made an ass out of Diskin
with that one.

Diskin: One might wonder just exactly what they're smoking
at the Senate.

JCT: We can tell by the lack of Diskin brain cells that he
hasn't been growing any new brain cells like the Senators
may have.

Hebscher: Joseph, we know it has some medicinal effects.

Goodwin: It doesn't for from a medicine for an epileptic or
someone with AIDS, cancer, multiple sclerosis, glaucoma, all
those conditions that it is verifiably a medicine for to a
toxic dangerous drug when I smoke it. It's just
irresponsible to say so.

Ben-Ami: Chris, that's just, I'm sorry but I'm not going to
let you get away with that.

JCT: Lie.... The liar calls him a liar. That's the purpose
of the liar, to reduce it to a shouting match. Of course, it
also helps that their liars scholarly-looking bearded and
mustached older guys in suits (dress for success) and Chris
is a kid, no tie.

Ben-Ami: That's absurd. There isn't, we all agree that the
dangerous narcotics should be prescribed under licensed
physician care and monitoring in order to treat certain
symptoms of illnesses, and if that's the case for medicinal
marijuana, that's fine. But that's not what we're talking
about here. We're talking about open sales of marijuana to
kids over 16 years over age and somehow, you're trying to
make this case that there is no harm.

Goodwin: There is no harm.

JCT: He had to rebut and call Joseph a liar.

Ben-Ami: We used to have a term for you when I was growing
up, it was "pusher."

JCT: No facts, only resorting to a cheap shot to back up his
lies. Pusher is now called grower. Cops and gardeners.

Goodwin: That's irresponsible, I'm not a pusher, I don't
sell marijuana.

JCT: No, Chris doesn't do that terrible thing. Notice how
Joseph put Chris on defensive by making him accept the
premise that growing and selling is wrong and making Chris
dance on defence to that premise. And probably look guilty
because almost everyone in the herbiz is guilty of selling a
bit to someone, buying it for you and someone, it's all
trafficking! So by admitting the premise that selling is
bad, Chris has been put out on defense.

Ben-Ami: We'll you're on camera telling our teen-agers that
there's no problem using this drug.

Goodwin: No, our Canadian Senate said that to our teen-
agers.

JCT: Beautiful coup. Ben-Ami came across like an idiot
instead of a learned rabbi.

Diskin: What do you sell?

Goodwin: Paraphenalia...

Diskin: Seeds?

Goodwin: Yes, seeds, bongs, pipes, papers.

Diskin: People could grow plants from the seeds you sell?

JCT: No, they grow horses.

Goodwin: Absolutely.

Hebscher: You mentioned legalisation. Would you settle for
decriminalization of marijuana? Fines, a misdemeanor? Or
it'll stay illegal in any amount.

Goodwin: I would never accept decriminalization model. It
causes more harm than it helps. Prohibition is the harm in
society. I have to go to a black market, I have no recourse
if I'm ripped off, police would arrest me, there are no
safety measures.

Ben-Ami: I have an answer, that is, if you don't want to go
through all of this problem, don't use the drug.

JCT: Better to end the prohibition causing the problem than
living with the symptom of a drug-free society. What an Ass.
Because we'll hurt you, better to obey.

Ben-Ami: Don't blame the police because there are
consequences to using illegal drugs.

JCT: No blame people like Ben-Ami for supporting the
consequences the police shouldn't blamed for causing.

H: Gotta go. Excellent arguments on both sides.

JCT: Both the truth and lies scored an "excellent." There is
only one way to defeat a sea of lies and tit-for-tat "not
true" isn't it. Fortunately, I'm a master of putting erudite
lying narc agents to flight. Google Groups for turmel and
Cammy to see how I made them back down on their lies in the
one and only winning strategy when faced with bald-faced
liars.

Sadly, Chris Goodwin doesn't have that technique but he
still put up a pretty good fight for the good guys.

>davidmalmolevine   Pot Head
>Re: Video of Chris on CH Live  [Re: Cannarchist]
>Date: #1223294 - Tue Mar 14 2006 07:13 AM

JCT: David Malmo-Levine, whose healthy guys want it for
recreation loss is touted as one of the government's
strongest.

DML: Nice job Chris. I especially like the caffeine
comparison. That left them with little to attack you with.

Next time you mention it, you could make it stronger by
mentioning there are records of US overdose deaths (6),
annual over-use deaths (1000-10,000 in North America) and
recognized withdrawal symptoms (headache) with caffeine, but
no overdose deaths, overuse deaths or withdrawal symptoms -
anywhere - with cannabis.

I also like the attempt at pointing out cannabis is medicine
for healthy people.

JCT: Gee, too bad he didn't raise healthy guys wanting it
for medicine instead of only for recreational purposes
before losing the big one. Glad to see he now sees the power
of healthy guys wanting it for medicine, the Turmel healthy
guy argument.

DML: You could make that argument stronger by pointing out
it has been a recognized medicine all over the world for
thousands of years for stress, depression, fatigue, loss of
appetite, lack of sleep, lack of motivation and lack of
focus.

JCT: Okay, I will.

DML: If you want to sound smarter than your opponents and
the anti-pot journalists

JCT: I point out cannabis explains why I have so many more
brain cells than they do.

DML: and cite way more examples of supportive studies than
they ever could muster for their reefer madness, you can
mention the Senate Report, the Vancouver 2005 study, the
LeDain Commission, the LeGuardia Report, the Wooton Report,
the Shafer Comission, the Indian Hemp commission - all of
which encouraged a lessening of penalties and all of which
pointed out there was no harm in PROPER USE of marijuana,
only in ABUSIVE USE.

JCT: Okay, why not.

DML: As for the caffeine comparison, the best study to cite
is the Henningfield/Benowitz studies (1994):
http://www.ndsn.org/AUGUST94/NICOTINE.html

By memorizing these studies and these arguments, you can
also demonstrate to all who are watching or listening that
cannabis doesn't harm the memory or brain function at all of
a chronic marijuana junkie like yourself.

If you want to familiarize yourself with the "proper
use/misuse" argument, check out my Supreme Court speech:
http://pot.tv/archive/shows/pottvshowse-1956.html
Goodluck in court and in all future media appearances!

JCT: Too bad David forgot to try this good idea when he had
his one big chance. What a great oversight to go only with a
healthy guys' right to recreation and forget the healthy
guys' right to medicine. Talk about blowing the big game.




--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: On March 10, 2006, Ontario Provincial Judge Pierre
Belanger handed down his decision on my Krieger application
to quash the charge of possession for the purpose of
trafficking during the 2-year window after July 31 2001 and
before Oct 7 2003 when the offence of possession was deemed
to be invalid, i.e., "repealed" pursuant to S.2(2) of the
Interpretation Act or "absent" pursuant to the Hitzig judges
decision.

Information No.: 08-20030

                   ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:                )
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN   ) Allyson Ratsoy for the
                         ) Crown/respondent
AND
JOHN TURMEL             ) Self-represented for the
                         ) accused/applicant

BELANGER, P.:

[1] The applicant has admitted the factual allegations which
underpin the charges brought against him. He asks, however,
that the charges against him be quashed based on his
interpretation of R. v. Krieger as well as a claim for abuse
of process.

[2] I reproduce, nearly in their entirety, the Crown's
submissions in response to the application brought by John
Turmel. I am of the view that those submissions accurately
reflect the chronology of events leading to the applicant's
eventual appearance before me. In addition, I agree entirely
with the Crown's analysis of the relevant issues and of the
law and adopt it as my own.

[3] The relevant parts of the Crown's submissions are as
follows:

>>
Part I: History of the Proceedings

1. Part I: History of the Proceedings

1. The applicant was charged on May 14, 2003 with possession
of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking. He was found to
have 3.277 kilograms of marijuana in a duffel bag he was
carrying. Although the amount of marijuana in his possession
was over 3 kilograms, the Crown proceeded on a charge of
possession under 3 kilograms, pursuant to sections 5.(2) and
5.(4) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA),

2. Although the offence under section 5.(4) of the CDSA is
an indictable offence, it falls within the category of
"absolute jurisdiction" offences established in section
553.(c)(xi) of the Criminal Code. That is, the trial of an
offence under section 5 (4) of the CDSA is within the
absolute jurisdiction of a provincial court judge and the
accused person does not have the options of electing to have
a preliminary hearing and/or electing to be tried by a judge
of the superior court.

3. The applicant's trial was initially set to proceed on
November 20,2003. On November 4th, 2003 the trial was
adjourned at the request of the applicant with the consent
of the Crown and a new date was set for June 11, 2004. On
June 4, 2004 a further adjournment was granted at the
request of the Crown with the consent of the applicant and a
new trial date was set for October 22, 2004. On October 22,
2004 the applicant argued a pre-trial application to quash
the charge, which was dismissed by the court. The trial
proper did not commence due to lack of time and a new date
was set for February 10, 2005. On February 2, 2005 the
applicant made another application to adjourn his trial.
This application was remanded to set a date for argument to
May 11, 2005. On that date a new trial date of December 15,
2005 was set, with a reporting date of December 1, 2005. On
the reporting date of December 1st, Belanger J. ruled that
the applicant's application to adjourn and another
application to quash which had been filed should be dealt -
with on the day set for trial by the trial judge.

Applications

4. On May 26, 2003 the applicant brought a "motion to quash
for mandamus and prohibition" in the Superior Court of
Justice. He asked the court to quash the information as it
disclosed no offence known to law. The basis of his argument
was that the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in R.
v. Parker', released on July 31, 2000, had invalidated all
prohibitions regarding marijuana contained in the CDSA. This
motion was dismissed by Aitken J. on the grounds that the
declaration made by the Court of Appeal in Parker related
only to section 4(1) of the CDSA and the applicant had been
charged under s.5(2) of that act.

5. The applicant appealed the ruling made by Aitken J. to
the Court of Appeal. The court dismissed the appeal on
October 7, 2003

6. On July 27, 2003 the applicant brought an application in
the Superior Court of Justice to "amend the information or
for particulars" in order to have the word "not" deleted
from the sentence "not exceeding 3 kgs". This application
was dismissed by Lalonde J. on the grounds that he did not
have any jurisdiction to make the amendment requested as the
offence was within the absolute jurisdiction of the
provincial court.

7. On October 22, 2004, a day scheduled for the applicant's
trial, the applicant again brought a motion to quash the
charge against him. He argued, as he had before Aitken J.,
that the offence with which he was charged was "no longer
known to law". The motion was dismissed by Earle-Renton J.
on the grounds that the Parker decision was determinative of
the issue. The applicant's trial did not proceed on this day
and the matter was adjourned to February 10, 2005.

8. On April 19, 2005 the applicant argued before Wright J.
in the Ontario Court of Justice that as on May 14. 2003 he
was in possession of an amount of marijuana greater than 3
kilograms, s. 553 of the Criminal Code did not apply and he
should have an election as to his mode of trial. He stated,
"I did my crime on purpose for the purpose of getting a jury
to discuss and decide on my situation..." Wright J.
dismissed the application, stating that it was within the
Crown's discretion to decide what charge to proceed with and
that "the accused doesn't get a say in what charges are
brought and the consequent mode of trial.."

9. On April 25,2005 the applicant brought a purported
"application for certiorari before Roy J. in the Superior
Court of Justice seeking to quash the decision of Wright J.
The applicant did not identify either in his materials or in
oral submissions the jurisdictional error made by Wright L
such that the remedy of certiorari was available or
appropriate. The application was dismissed by Roy J. without
prejudice to the applicant's right to bring it again, as he
had not provided the court with a transcript of the
proceedings before Wright J.

10. On November 28,2005 the applicant re-launched his
application for certiorari, along with an application for
prohibition, before MacLeod J. of the Superior Court of
Justice. The application for prohibition requested an order
staying the charge "as an abuse of the court process on the
grounds all statutes related to marijuana are of no force
and effect and the Crown knows it". MacLeod J. dismissed the
application for certiorari as she could find no
jurisdictional error made by Wright J. She dismissed the
application for prohibition, finding that the Ontario Court
of Appeal's decision in R. v. Hitzig was binding on her.

11. On December 11,2005 the applicant served the Crown with
notices of appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal pertaining
to MacLeod J.'s dismissal of his applications for certiorari
and prohibition.

12. At the outset of his trial on December 15,2005 before
Belanger J., the applicant brought an application to adjourn
his trial and sought to argue an application to quash the
charge against him. Belanger J. dismissed the application to
adjourn and declined to hear oral submissions on the
application to quash, requesting that the applicant and
Crown provide written submissions according to a schedule
set by the court,

Part II : Issues and the Law

13. The applicant's Notice of Application asks the court to
quash the charge against on two grounds.

Ground One - the Krieger Decision

14. The applicant seeks an order "quashing charges relating
to marijuana under s.7(1) of the CDSA as unknown to law on
the grounds Parliament has not re-enacted the s.7
cultivation (and by implication s.4 possession) prohibitions
which underpin all other marijuana prohibitions in the CDSA
since they were struck down by the Alberta Court of Appeal
in R. v. Krieger on December 4, 2002."

15. The case of R. v. Krieger6 was concerned with the
constitutionality of the prohibition against the cultivation
of marijuana in the context of Mr. Krieger's production and
use of marijuana to alleviate his suffering from multiple
sclerosis. Acton J. of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench
held that section 7.(1) of the CDSA, which makes cultivation
of marijuana an offence, offended Mr. Krieger's rights to
liberty and security of the person as guaranteed by section
7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, She therefore
struck down s.7(l) to the extent that it dealt with the
production of cannabis marijuana. However she suspended the
declaration of invalidity for one year in order to give the
federal government to arrange for a legal source of
marijuana to be made available to those who legitimately
required it for therapeutic use.

16. In 2001 the Alberta Court of Appeal extended the
suspension of the declaration of invalidity made by Acton J.
"until further order of the Court". In fact, that suspension
has never been lifted, presumably because subsequent legal
challenges in Ontario resulted in federal regulations
allowing for lawful access to marijuana for therapeutic
use.7 The constitutional defect in s.7(l) of the CDSA, which
led Acton J. to strike down the section, has thereby been
addressed and remedied and the suspension and declaration
have become moot.

17. The applicant's analysis of the effect of the Krieger
decision on the marijuana provisions of the CDSA is flawed.
The authority to issue a declaration of invalidity is found
in section 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which says:
s.52(l) 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, (emphasis added)

18. The Krieger decision affected only s.7(l) of the CDSA
and, as Acton J. was careful to state, only to the extent
that that it dealt with the production of marijuana. The
applicant's assertion that s.7(l) "underpins" all other
marijuana prohibitions in the CDSA is neither factually nor
legally correct. In fact, in the Krieger decision Acton J.
upheld the constitutionality of s.5(2) of the CDSA - the
prohibition against possession of marijuana for the purpose
of trafficking - which had also been challenged by Mr.
Krieger. Section 4.(1) of the CDSA - simple possession - was
not addressed in the Krieger case.

19. In any event, a decision made by an Alberta court has no
binding effect in the province of Ontario. Even if the
suspension of the order striking down s.7(1) of the CDSA had
been lifted in Alberta, this would not have changed the
status of that provision in Ontario. Further, the applicant
is not charged under s.7(l) of the CDSA.

Ground Two - Abuse of Process

20. The applicant further seeks an order staying the charge
against him as an "abuse of the court process on the grounds
all statutes related to marijuana are of no force and effect
and the Crown knows it." Although the basis for this
argument is not explicitly stated, the applicant appears to
be relying on a series of cases concerning the
constitutionality of sections 4.(1) and 7.(1) of the CDSA
which unfolded in Ontario and other provinces between 2001
and 2003. The Crown reference only to those cases which it
considers relevant to the issues the Court.

21. In R. v. Parker8, a decision of the Ontario Court of
Appeal released on July 31, 2000, the court held that the
prohibition on simple possession of marijuana in section 4
of the CDSA must be struck down as it infringed the rights
to liberty and security of the person guaranteed by section
7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in a manner that did
not accord with the principles of fundamental justice. Mr.
Parker suffered from a particularly severe form of epilepsy
which was only moderately alleviated by conventional
treatment. He found that by smoking marijuana he could
substantially reduce the incidence of his seizures and
having no legal source of marijuana, began to grow it
himself. The declaration of invalidity made by the court on
July 31, 2000 was suspended for 11 months to give Parliament
time to develop and legislate an adequate mechanism for
individuals to possess marijuana for valid medicinal
purposes.

22. In response to the Court of Appeal's declaration of
invalidity the federal government enacted the Marihuana
Medical Access Regulations (MMAR), which came into force on
July 30, 2001. Eleven applicants, including Mr. Parker, a
Mr. Hitzig. and Mr. Turmel, then sought orders from the
Superior Court declaring that the MMAR violated their s,7
rights. On January 9, 2003, Lederman J. declared the MMAR
invalid as they failed to adequately provide for a legal,
safe and reliable source of marijuana. He suspended this
declaration of invalidity for six months. All parties
appealed. The Court of Appeal's decision was released on
October 7, 2003 In Hitzig et al v. Her Majesty the Queen,9

23. In Hitzig, the Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the
federal government's appeal and found that the MMAR were
unconstitutional and a violation of the applicants' section
7 rights as they failed to craft an adequate medical
exemption into the offence of possession of marijuana in
section 4 of the CDSA. Rather than strike down the MMAR in
their entirety and declare s.4 of the CDSA to be of no force
and effect, the Court set aside the declaration of
invalidity made by Lederman J. and crafted a narrower remedy
more specifically targeted to the shortcomings it identified
in the MMAR. The Court itself created a constitutionally
valid medical exemption to s.4 of the CDSA, thereby making
s.4 of full force and effect in Ontario as of October 7,
2003. However, the court found that between July 31, 2001
(the date that the suspension of invalidity declared in
Parker expired) and October 7, 2003, there had been no
constitutionally valid prohibition against the possession of
marijuana in Ontario.

24. On the same day that it released the Hitzig decision,
the Court of Appeal released its decision on the applicant's
appeal of the judgment of Aitken J.1 (See paragraph 4.) The
applicant had argued that the effect of the court's ruling
in Parker was to delete marijuana from schedule II of the
CDSA, therefore rendering all marijuana offences in the CDSA
"of no force and effect".

25. The court held that the applicant's argument was based
on a "fundamental misconception" and said the following:

"The declaration of invalidity made by this court in
Parker... does not delete marihuana from Schedule II of the
CDSA. It simply declares that the reference to marihuana in
Schedule II is of no force or effect for the purposes of the
possession charge in s.4 of the CDSA. The declaration does
not extend to any other section of the CDSA, In particular,
it does not diminish the effect of the listing of marihuana
in Schedule II "for the purposes of s.5(2) of the CDSA. As a
result, the charge of possession of marihuana for the
purposes of trafficking existed on May 26,2003." Thus Aitken
J. was correct to dismiss the appellant's argument and we
would dismiss his appeal.11 (emphasis added)
>>

[4] I am entirely satisfied that the grounds upon which the
application is based have been ruled upon by Courts whose
reasons both bind me and persuade me. I am unable to craft a
decision which is in any way more eloquent or complete in
its analysis than that which as been advanced by counsel for
the Crown. I am not swayed by the applicant's submissions
and entreaties that I decline to abide by the decisions of
hierarchically superior courts. I refuse to do so, both on
principle and because I am in total agreement with them.

[5] The application is dismissed.

[6] The accused admits the factual elements of the Crown's
case and has stated that he had no evidence to call. He has
essentially admitted that only this application stands in
the way of a guilty finding. (See transcript of December 15
at p.38). He is consequently found guilty of the charge that
brings him to court.

[7] We will now proceed to a sentencing hearing.
Paul R. Belanger
Senior Justice.

JCT:  This presumed I didn't want to do a constitutional
challenge or put in a defence of necessity and
justification.

Page 37-38

THE COURT: That's the problem. Of course, I can go through
with the application to quash, but it would've been
preferable to have a complete record of all of the case
before me. The Crown, here, has a prima facie case, but
you're entitled to call evidence. Not argument, now. The
argument, I'll hear, we've said....

JCT: So I still had the chance to present argument, just no
evidence

MR. TURMEL: Well, then, I have no evidence. I'll have no
evidence to call, Your Honour.
THE COURT: I mean evidence, for example, to show that you
were not in possession, evidence to show that this was not
marijuana, any defence evidence....
MR. TURMEL: No, nothing like that at all. Nothing like that
at all.

JCT: But something like justification, necessity,
constitutional invalidity...

THE COURT: And can you tell me, just so I can gauge
properly, what it is that you might.... And I'm not saying
that I'm forcing you if you say, "I will call that
evidence." I'll leave that open, if that's your desire. But,
what would be the nature of the evidence that you would
think of calling if you did call evidence?
MR. TURMEL: I wouldn't have any evidence to call with
respect to those facts at all.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. TURMEL: It would be strictly to do with the law, and if
the law's still alive, I'm in big trouble.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. TURMEL: That's my point. So, there are going to be
no.... I would probably, if the law was judged alive, maybe
even plead guilty, but I've stood mute. But, I just mean
there's no defence to offer, and I'm not going to challenge
any of the facts.
THE COURT: And that was your point.
MR. TURMEL: Yes.
THE COURT: Your point, indeed, was to make a clear and
patent case...
MR. TURMEL: Yes.
THE COURT:...so that the authorities would prosecute, so
that then...
MR. TURMEL: Yes.
THE COURT:...you would have an opportunity to challenge the
legislation...
MR. TURMEL: Yes, Your Honour.
THE COURT:...and that this was...
MR. TURMEL: That's right.
THE COURT:...your desire. Fine. So I'll assume, then, that
on the basis of what you say, that the case is before me...
MR. TURMEL: Yes.
THE COURT:...on the facts.
MR. TURMEL: Yes.
THE COURT: And that there -
MR. TURMEL: There's nothing else coming.

JCT: Except arguments on the facts, lots of them.

THE COURT: - there's no other evidence to be called on the
issue. Obviously, I'm going to refrain from rendering a
decision on guilt or innocence until such time as I have
heard fully the arguments on all sides so that I can make a
decision -- which may be appealed by one side or the other,
but at least there'll be a full and formal record before any
appellate or reviewing tribunal in order to assess the worth
of my own judgment, and then that....And as I say, from
either side. I'm not prejudging the issue in any way. Thank
you.

JCT: I'm going to have to add one ground of appeal, that I
did not get a full defence. Not even "any last words?"



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: I asked the people at ijccr who hold discussions with
Bill Ryan to shun him until he stops vandalising my posts on
usenet. Only Richard Day and Ernie Yacub have registered
their approbation by still chatting with him.

I've sent another, my fourth, complaint to the abuse
moderator at Google:

As you can see, this response is done by a bot and covers
up the true article original titles so using your engine to
search doesn't come up with variety but mostly the pissy
responses.
This is my fourth complaint.

JCT: It's starting to become a joke, isn't it? A big mega-
corporate search engine's utility is sabotaged and they
don't act?

Anyway, if you are interested in what birds of a feather
Ryan, Kay and Yacub are talking about, it's at the
http://yahoogroups.com/group/ijccr/messages

I just wish they get him upset so he'll start going after
them.




--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: I hope you remember when Alison Myrden offered to help
Chris Goodwin get well-known Court Clutz, Alan Young, (whose
team of legal beagles have contributed to the Governments'
arsenal of precedents with the Clay loss, Wakeford loss,
Hitzig loss, Malmo-Levine loss, have I forgotten any big
ones that have hurt us) into his case. Here is recent news
from the Cannabis Vulture's web site, though I've only
included posts from the well-known moles, Marc The Narc
Emery and his moll Jodie, Alison "My Hitzig-Myrden case
brought marijuana prohibition back to life, oops" Myrden,
and the bustee Chris Goodwin. I couldn't even read it all
but the ending gets interesting. is the Hamilton bust
another Court Clutz Kamikaze Case? How's it going to hurt us
now?

goodster        Up In Smoke Cafe
Date: #1222051 - Sat Mar 11 2006 01:32 AM

I just got out of Jail less than 12 hours ago and have
finally been updated fully on the status of the security
breach that may have taken place, so before I go into
anything else I would like to issuing this SECUITY WARNING.

During the warrentless raid by Hamilton Police they seized
an Expresspost envelope from a customer that arrived just an
hour before, as well as the Envelope I was going to send to
them and the seeds for the package. As well, they have the
cash register reciept for that day with the payment of those
seeds as a sale in the till.

They also seized my online seed sales tracking book which
had the last 5 days of orders that had not been shipped that
was waiting on stock, in hard copy form, with information
about the return address and the order. That information is
always distroyed once an order is complete, ussually between
3-5 days from the time I recieve an order.

However dilligent we always were at keeping our customers
information safe, there is always the chance that police
will obtain information during a raid that may be harmfull
to customers privacy on that specific day, or within a short
period of time prior to the raid.

Nothing else was comprimised in regrards to seed sales, and
the police did take all those items without a warrant,
However this is still very serious. I will also be issuing a
release to warn each individual customer who may have any
security worries.

I have yet to give my employees any instructions as how to
handle this except to say that we are open as usual. I
handled all online orders personally, and the announcment on
www.upinsmokecafe.ca about "Don't Buy Seeds" was done
without my instruction, but with the security of customers
in mind, plus the fact that only I know the information
nessesary to complete and pay for online orders, so sales
were halted for the last 3 days by my employee.

I will be contacting everyone who has an order pending
within the next couple hours and sending them a pre writen
warning similar to this, with instruction on how best to
handle it.

The last security breach was that they have a backup disk of
my DMS Sales on my Computer for the last 18 months as we
were wiping the computer clean a couple days prior. This
information on the disc is encripted with a couple
passwords, but this is also very serious. It doesn't harm
any customers as no information other than the general sales
could be found, but now they have my full sales history if
they can access it.

Since online sales have been halted for the last 3 days now,
there have not been any orders sent out. If you ordered from
me and recieve anything without further instruction from me,
I would be cautious to its authenticity.

Online sales will continue under a NEW policy soon, with a
NEW Post Office Box and I will still handle online orders.
If you have an order pending or in the mail and would like
me to send you the order, let me know and I will be using
NEW procedures to have it sent with much safer methods than
before. I will also be sending customers a NEW return
address that I will use so you will know it's from the Up In
Smoke Cafe when it arrives. Otherwise you can cancel your
order and I can send you a refund or not send anything at
all or you can send me another address for a refund. Either
way it's up to each customer, but with my complete assurance
that whatever my customers decide I will be as carefull with
all personal information as I always have been.

My Deepest Appologies to anyone else who may have been
affected by his. I will do everything I can to make sure
everyone is safe. Regards  Chris Goodwin Up In Smoke Cafe
www.upinsmokecafe.ca
--------------------

goodster       Up In Smoke Cafe
Date: #1222057 - Sat Mar 11 2006 02:48 AM

Hello everyone,
I just got on CC an hour ago and this is all overwelming.
20+ pages that I just finished reading, and WOW. I am so
thankfull for everyones support. I havn't even seen any
footage yet. This is so amazing.
Steph, John, Davin, Chris, Steve, Adam, Joey, Alison, Tim,
Marc, Jodie, and eveyone else who thought of me enough to
help, THANK YOU!!!!
I was released less than 12 hours ago from the John Sopinka
Court House on Bail. I was NEVER on Bail or had any
conditions from the Two previous arrests last June and July
of 2005.
I am on NO sleep and No food, really. I tried to eat over
the last 3 days, but the food was so bad, and two nights in
a freezing cold sell with no pillow, a crappy banket and
only a cold steel bed, I didn't get any sleep. I was fine
though, as those are just the regular conditions of jail.
All I could think about was how everyone was doing outside.
Was Steph, Davin and Steve O alright? I was just worried and
I had a million question going through my head, and still
do. I loved reading hte last 3 days in one hour though. It
brings me up to date on alot of issues.
Now, alot of people have asked what happened to me.
First of all, I spend 90% of the last 3 days in either the
basement of Hamilton Central Station or the basement of the
John Sopinka Court House in ancle Shackels and cuffs. In
both cases I was not aloud to talk to anyone but my lawyer.
No phone calls, No visits from family or friends.
It made it very difficult for me to get new information or
give new instructions to my staff. The times I did get to
talk to people were very breaf and required I only recieve
important information. I wanted to know everything but time
would not allow it.
Barton Street Correctional was great. All the inmated from
the Court House or Central Station all wanted to be taken to
Barton ASAP no matter where they were. The have ok food and
the standard ranges of 20-30 people in a 20-30 "dorm" style
rooms with a TV, Newspapers, games etc. With 10 small cells
along two walls. The place is so packed we had to sleep 3 to
a cell with only 2 beds. All of Barton Is like that.
However I only stayed at Barton for less than 12 hours. But
the time I was there was great. I arrived at Barton right
before the 6pm news started, and half the inmates already
knew who I was. Not to overindulge, but the place went nuts
when the News came on, even in other cell block we could
here chanting and they treated me like a celebrity till 6am
the next mourning. It was great.
I have to say hi to Chris, Daren, Omer, Paul, Blackwood and
all the guys on 3C Left. I hope to see you guys at the cafe
when we are all alloud there.
The gaurds were even very cool. From the second I arived in
Barton till the Next mourning transfer, I hade a great time.
Marc was right in his jail blogs two years ago when he
mentioned that if your an activist, inmates tend to put
imediate trust in you, as they would otherwise be suspicious
about narcs or status.
But with me they seemed to confess every crime they ever
did, but with a lighter tone than they would otherwise talk
to their criminal buddies. It might be because when I spoke
as I always do, it was not something they are used to
hearing. An activist breaking the law, risking my freedom to
finally aquire it, but with a political, moral and ethical
intent is forign to them, but they were all very interested.
A couple police officers and other profesionals made some
very harsh comments to me over the last 4 days as well. But
I should mention what I believed started this raid....

First, it was noon on Wednesday March 8th and everything was
as usual at the cafe. The Police Cheif and all the News
media were gearing up for his big announcment that the
Attorny General had Closed the Sand Bar (crack house). So
davin got a couple volenteers to go down and hand out
literature. I went down an hour later by myself as they were
starting the press conference.
For the first 5 minutes or so I was just observing, but near
the end I began to jump in with comments.
This is were I would like to clarify a couple points as the
police, crown and a few media people have misqouted me.
I was NOT against the closure of the Sand Bar. There have
been a couple murders there recently and the building is so
bad it should have been condemded a long time ago.
Givin that, I was only being critical of the Cheifs message
that the closure of the Sand Bar and the couple dozen
arrests that took place was the final Solution Hamilton
needed and now the Downtown is safe to bring your children.

I said to CHTV that they were "Showboating a Bandaid
Solution at best" and that "This in no way changes the
safety of the downtown core. The police have now created
more job oportunities and will now find that hard drug use
will be more staggered throughout other abandoned buildings,
our alleys and dark corners of downtown and may have placed
hard drug use back on the street without ever addresing the
real social factors that lead to the issue we have."

After my interview CHTV began asking the Police Cheif, The
Head of the BIA and Other members of the Press Releace Camp
for their opinion, in which two of them said that the Up In
Smoke Cafe should be next and the Cheif mad a couple
comments along the lines on "We would like to close other
unruly businesses businesses in Hamilton" basicly refering
to me.

I began questioning the people that made those comments one
on one to defend their possition as other bysandards jumped
in as well. In a couple key molments afterwards I began a
loud 2-3 minute speach that was very critical of all the
comments made and went back to the cafe after they began
leaving.

Now within 30 minutes of arriving back, the came into the
cafe to arrest and raid us. I believe these instences are
directly related. They don't like it when we are vocal and
they thought they had the advantage of Closing the Sand Bar
as credibiltiy to go ahead with a bust.

I also want to point out that since our Free Pot Smoke Out
on August 20th of 2005, we have only had two police vists
that were both friendly and none in the last 6 months. That
was amazing considering over 250 police visits in the 12
months prior. In the last 6 months we had the huge rally in
August, 6 protests at the courthouse from September through
January, The Jack Layton Pot media, and Election, The
Cannabis Crawl and Peace Summit, and The CAS investigation,
which was huge on it's own withd a tone of other local,
provincial and Nation media along the way.

For them to come now seemed strange. Some have said this may
be a result of the Steven Harper Consevative Govenment with
more to come nation wide, and although there is probaly some
truth to that, I believe this was more local, and more
geared specificaly to the Sand Bar.

I don't believe the concervative govenment has a huge
influence in changing the social climate of cannbis right
now. They have a VERY small minority and must be very
carefull. Although they still can push for tougher laws
which in effect sets the tone for what looks to be tougher
enforcment. However, I don't think it will go much behond
that. I HOPE....
----------

Finally, my Lawyer has advised me to lodge a Formal Compaint
for unlawfull search and seizure and we are discussing a
possible court challenge. I will update eveyone by Monday -
Tuesday as to our defence strategy.

JCT: No kidding. The standard and only challenge in a
Canadian Defenfe lawyer's bag.

As of now I'm on Bail Conditions that restrict me from being
within 200m of the Up In Smoke Cafe and not to have contact
with Stephanie Spicer. Of course there is the regualr, No
Pot, Keep The Peace and Be Of Good Behaviour etc. But we
will be having a bail hearing this week to amend those
conditions.
Otherwise I will have to opperate the business from afar. I
can communicate through cell phone, live web cam, email, etc
and John and Chris have everything under control. These guys
are amazing and have my deepest thanks for their efforts on
my behalf. Thanks  Enough typing for now.  Thanks Again
Chris Goodwin
--------------------

goodster       Up In Smoke Cafe
Date: #1222374 - Sat Mar 11 2006 10:34 PM
Quote: Chris Goodwin does not seem to be perplexed as to why
his conditions are as they are. He will seek to change them.
I expect that Mr. Goodwin understands better than most that
the law is the law so I will not need to be informing him.
Chris Buors

Yes I am very certain why I recieved the conditions I got.
It is standard tactics. But the statment that "the law is
the law" is not exactly true. In regards to the application
of the law and sentencing, there is clearly a vast amount of
disparity accross Canada that is related to community
standards as you said. But this in itself violates the
"equal application" of the law in the Charter.

However, in regards to "respecting" the law, you are right
that "the law is the law". Try violating your Bail
conditions that you agreed to abide by and you get sent to
jail anywere in Canada.

Quote: I'm sure the high priced legal help he has can tell
him all about it. Justice Defiled would be a good read if
you have trouble with the concept.
You Mr. Poet ought to keep in mind that community standards
rule in Canada. Marc Emery went to jail for three months for
passing a joint in Saskatchewan.  Chris Buors

Speaking of Justice Defiled, I have a signed copy right in
front of me. I also had a long conversation with Allan Young
a couple hours ago and I will be meeting with him and my
Lawyer, Peter Bouchy very soon to further discuss press
strategy, legal recourse, precedence etc.
Allan Young and Myself will also be on CHTV Live at 5 on
Monday afternoon to discuss the Up In Smoke Cafe Raid.

JCT: That's later today and it might be on-line.

However nieve I may be to the reality right now in certain
parts of Canada, I still believe I could open an Up In Smoke
Cafe in Manatoba and be just as sucessfull. If shut down I
would reopen. It requires only one leader, one person to
take the risk and others will follow.

JCT: The movement needs new leaders....

But of course, the only reason I exist at all is community
support. But that support is Canada wide, with very little
veriation in stats. Even if it seems that there is a strong
majority of opposition to your cause, that is mearly
preception and doesn't reflect reality.

I have had way to many molments when it looked as if
EVERYONE was against me and there was NO chance of winning,
yet I stood strong, vigilant, and for some karmic reason,
the tides always turned to balance in my favour.

And although it's some of the most stressfull molments for
most people, it has never really bothered me in the
slightest.
Chris Goodwin
---

goodster       Up In Smoke Cafe
Date: #1222385 - Sat Mar 11 2006 11:08 PM

Allan Young and Myself will also be on CHTV Live at 5:30pm
on Monday March 13th to discuss the Up In Smoke Cafe Raid.
I hope Tim could capture it, it should be fun. I will
probably be on with Donna Skelly and Mark Hebscher again.
You may remember them from the CAS case on CHTV were Donna
said "did your wife smoke pot during her Pregnancy" I said
"Yes" and she said "you lost me now" and they used that 5
second clip for there commercials for the next month.
Crazy......
feedback@...
Please Email them, but wait till monday afternoon for best
results on them reading it live. Allan Young should be an
amazing guest on CHTV as he is the perfect profesional
middle class activist. I can't wait to get on there and
defend my possition with honour with Yound there too. I
can't wait, I'm excited.

DONNA SKELLY
Always a vibrant and dynamic on-screen presence, Donna's
experience and community intuitiveness has ensured her
status as a prominent member of the CH family. more
MARK HEBSCHER
Never one to shy away from a challenge, Mark is taking his
in-your-face style and forthright attitude to a whole new
venue, Host, CH Live @5:30. more
www.canada.com/chtv/hamilton
--------------------

goodster       Up In Smoke Cafe
Date: #1222566 - Sun Mar 12 2006 01:03 PM
Quote: So it takes a little more than will to compete with
that.

Personal will is all it takes. Nothing else compaires to the
will of one individual.
Chris Buors, you should become the change you wish to seek.
I sarted the cafe on very little money, and have had
hundreds of scarry money molments were I thought I wasn't
going to make it finacially, never mind politicly or
legally. Sales were slow the first year even though I spent
$20,000 in activism that first year.

Seven other Head shops in Hamilton alone. Some are huge,
with lots of money, and they all have the new 2006 escalade,
the cabin up north, (Gold Bricks) etc. Not one has ever
helped more than simply putting a poster in the shop with
some handbills.

But guess what. That tide has shifted in the last six
months. Our sales are double what theres are now and I have
faith it will continue to rise.

Quote: No one else ever tried to start a club or do any
activism here in Winnipeg.

Because they need a leader. Someone to follow. I just woke
up from a 14 hour sleep, as I havn't slept more than 5 hours
in 4 days and none in two full days, but I feel better now.
I'm ready to continue on...

Quote: So you can rest assured that someone here in Winnipeg
is making big bucks from the headshop business.

Take it from them. Or take back what is rightfully ours. Big
business, faceless companies, that don't care about who they
profit from don't last very long. Their only advantage is
that they can outlast you legally. No one is going to shut
them down and you may feel like your going to be daily, but
I asure you it's worth every second as your well awair.
I think you should get back on the horse. But to each is own
I guess, ased on thier level of comfort and ability.

Quote: I really wish someone with a couple of bucks would
step forward here in Winnipeg to bring us up to speed with
other provinces but I won't hold my breath.

Money right now is not the issue, and it probably will NEVER
come from that ONE Person you wished it did.
Marc helped start Vansterdame by selling hightimes and Hemp
and Marijuana Magazine door to door for a couple bucks each,
before opening the little hemp bc. Of course we know how
that story evolved, and I'm sure you understand it.

Quote: Nothing but people who needed help came forward.

I found that to be mostly true as well. The ones that do
come forward now with money, only walk in a buy a Volcano
and a couple thousand in seeds and leave, while they are
there, they make comments that they will support us with
there wallet because I risk my life for this, but they are
still scared to be in the cafe, but I could have not
survived without thier support.

But the only reason the Up In Smoke Cafe recieved that money
support was because the of the most vulnerable, with the
least money stood up beside me. In the begining, I could
only really offer my courage, and they stood shoulder to
shoulder with me breaking the law.

Some have questioned and critized this part of my activism
as some of those people are what are considered to be
Hippies, Downtown Street People, Rebelious Youth, misfits,
some on welfare, disablity or a pentioners, some have
nothing. But they offer loyalty, commitment, and courage
when a leader does.

Just my thoughts and ideas Chris. I have the highest respect
for what you do and have done, and this in no way is
criticism. And even if past quotes sound like it, I only
attack or debate ideas, not people. Thanks Chris Goodwin
P.S. Look Out For New Activist Head Shop Coming Soon
STILL SMOKING Coming Late 2006....... Hint Hint
--------------------

goodster  Up In Smoke Cafe
Date: #1222710 - Sun Mar 12 2006 07:44 PM

www.upinsmokecafe.ca has just reaches 1,000,000 Hits, thats
One Million, Wooo Hooo.
We used to only get 2-5,000 hits on a good Month max.
Since the first BIG CC article came out in January we were
getting 10,000 Hits on good days, and now in the last 5 days
since the Raid, We are now averaging over 15,000 Hits a day,
with some 20,000 Hit days.
After running 1/3rd page ads for the last 4 issues we went
from 5,000 in a month to 20,000 hits imediatly for
September. 45,000 Hits in October, 80,000 Hits is November
and December, and 135,000 Hits in January.
After the BIG CC article hit the news stands in late
January, we had 300,000 hits in February and are expected to
top 450,000 Hits in March.
This is amazing exposure. I'm so excited about those
numbers. Thanks to everyone who supported us.
Chris Goodwin Up In Smoke Cafe
--------------------



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: I hope you remember when Alison Myrden offered to help
Chris Goodwin get well-known Court Clutz, Alan Young, (whose
team of legal beagles have contributed to the Governments'
arsenal of precedents with the Clay loss, Wakeford loss,
Hitzig loss, Malmo-Levine loss, have I forgotten any big
ones that have hurt us) into his case. Here is recent news
from the Cannabis Vulture's web site, though I've only
included posts from the well-known moles, Marc The Narc
Emery and his moll Jodie, Alison "My Hitzig-Myrden case
brought marijuana prohibition back to life, oops" Myrden,
and the bustee Chris Goodwin. I couldn't even read it all
but the ending gets interesting. is the Hamilton bust
another Court Clutz Kamikaze Case? How's it going to hurt us
now?

Cannabis Culture Magazine
>Subject: Up In Smoke Busted?????
>From: AlisonMyrden enthusiast
>Date: #1220799 - Wed Mar 08 2006
Holy shit...
And someone said NOT to panick???
Chris was the last retailer in this end of Canada to be
selling Seeds on line after the big busts of HS and Marc.

JCT: Talk about helping indict Chris too.

Wonder if THAT has anything to do with this latest Bust???
What the hell is going on?
Now things are really going to start heating up...
Just watch. Alison
----

AlisonMyrden
Date: #1220822 - Wed Mar 08 2006 02:47 PM
Just contacted CH NEWS and they are heading over there NOW!
Will watch to see if they run it a dinner or later on...
Either way the woman I sopoke to was VERY interested...
Contact ALL LOCAL MEDIA NOW!!!
I'll keep you guys posted.. Alison xx
----

AlisonMyrden
Date: #1220833 - Wed Mar 08 2006 02:54 PM
Just left a message for Mullen's Assistant.
Repeated and SPELLED my name for her and said I DEMANDED
positive movement in this issue and that it was an OUTRAGE
that the Hamilton Police arrested and charged people I do
business with! Now where are we to get our medicine from???
What a terribe day in our Country!!!  Alison
---

AlisonMyrden
Date: #1220837 - Wed Mar 08 2006 02:59 PM
Not feeling up to it myself today as have had a really bad
last few days with the pain in my face...
Sorry to let you guys down... Can anyone else show up???
Media should be there soon I hope...  Ali xx
----

AlisonMyrden
Date: #1220848 - Wed Mar 08 2006 03:08 PM
Just captured it on my Computer...
Will figure out how to send it in a sec...
Saved the part where they were talking about the Sand Bar
and how they are closing it down due to Cocaine as Tim said
and then this: and "Up the road, the Up in Smoke Cafi was
just raided and three people were arrested, details
later..." So happy I called them when I did!!!
Will watch the News at 11pm for details I hope... Alison xx
---

AlisonMyrden
Date: #1220852 - Wed Mar 08 2006 03:14 PM
Just talked to Gary and we're on our way to the Cafi.
FUCK THE GOVERNMENT!!! FUCK MY HEALTH!!!
I am seriously angry about this month, Harper and all of the
arrests  across the Country for a HARMLESS SUBSTANCE !!!
Anyone wanna come???
We'll be there in front of the Cafi within the hour.
Gary and Alison
----

AlisonMyrden
Date: #1220864 - Wed Mar 08 2006 03:25 PM
I would suggest to PASS the WORD
We should demonstrate TONIGHT!!!
NOW IS THE TIME FOR ACTION!!!
I am SERIOUS.
TONIGHT HAS to be the NIGHT.
I'm on my way in a few minutes. Won't take my wheelchair as
it takes too much to load in the truck and stuff...
Besides, I don't care if I am by myself. Ive done it before.
Tomorrow, may be too late... Ali xx
---

JodieGR
Date: #1220871 - Wed Mar 08 2006 03:33 PM
Alison, you are AMAZING. We love you. Be Strong!
---

JodieGR  CC Assistant Editor
Date: #1220977 - Wed Mar 08 2006 06:15 PM
So Chris is not to be released, as he broke his bail
conditions from a previous possession charge.
This is NOT good. Chris Goodwin in JAIL? It appears so... He
can't get bail if he's already in breach of previous
conditions.
We need some people to rally and get together and support
the Cafe for when it opens up again...
Marc is working on the story to be posted on the main page
of CC right now.
---

JodieGR CC Assistant Editor
Date: #1220994 - Wed Mar 08 2006 06:43 PM

Up In Smoke Cafe in Hamilton Raided by Police
by Marc Emery (08 Mar, 2006)

Reports came in after police answered telephone

The Up In Smoke Cafe in Ontario was raided Wednesday, March
8th and owner Chris Goodwin was arrested along with three
employees and taken to Hamilton Police Headquarters.

The charge against Goodwin is possession and trafficking.
Stephanie ("Bong Pixie on the CC Forums) is charged with
possession and trafficking in pot cookies. Davin
("Maddchronic" on the CC Forums) is charged with possession.

After the nearby Sandbar Tavern in Hamilton was seized by
police as a "crack house", a plain clothes police officer
entered Up In Smoke. Chris, Davin and a volunteer Steve were
smoking a joint. The plain clothes officer snatched the
joint out of Davin's hand and said "You're all under arrest
for possession of a controled substance."

Goodwin was led away with the two others while police
inspected the premises. They eventually took the cash
register and computer for the store. No warrant was
presented to anyone. The store closed at 9:00pm and the
police have left.

Goodwin is being held overnight with a court appearance on
Thursday morning for bail. Chris' previous charges for
possession will likely incur the removal of his bail and its
possible Goodwin could be in jail for some time. His lawyer
is Peter Bushie. Stephanie will likely be in jail in
overnight.

Chris Goodwin is the most visible and uncompromising
cannabis legalization activist in Ontario. His shop, Up In
Smoke Cafe, had been visited by Hamilton police over 200
times in its 18 month history, and over 30 customers have
been charged with marijuana possession on various visits.

Up In Smoke was selling seeds, bongs, pipes and had a
private lounge for members to smoke and use vaporizers.

We are in contact with Chris Goodwin's parents and staff of
the Up In Smoke Cafe, and will post more details here as
they become available.  To stay up to date, people can call
the Pot Poet Chris Lawson at 905-525-0330.
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/4690.html
Edited by Marc Scott Emery (Wed Mar 08 2006 07:00 PM)
--------------------

Marc Scott Emery  The Prince of Pot
Date: #1221001 - Wed Mar 08 2006 06:59 PM
might be worth keeping note that it appears the cops were
using chris' login on the CC forums ... only thing i saw
them doing was checking the "who's online" portion, but i'm
pretty sure that's a violation of law somewhere ... i'm no
lawyer though, so perhaps someone w/ little more knowledge
in this area can comment on that...

Chris' computer was on these forums 24 hours a day. The cops
weren't surfing the net on his account while they were
there, I assure you.
---

JodieGR CC Assistant Editor
Date: #1221057 - Wed Mar 08 2006 08:45 PM

That's insane. You HAVE TO OPEN, or you'll be shut down for
good!
Marc Emery KNOWS this stuff and just gave step-by-step
procedures to John. You guys MUST follow his advice. You
have to open, try to make money, encourage people to come
back and unite and support each other!

JCT: Marc "I didn't know my lawyer was going to plead me
guilty" Emery knows his stuff.

Marc's been raided and arrested and jailed and closed so
many times, and the reason he's still around today is
because HE WOULDN'T STAND DOWN.

JCT: He was busy pleading guilty and bowing down.

YOU HAVE TO CONVINCE CHRIS TO OPEN UP IN SMOKE CAFE or it's
the END of that amazing activist outlet and there's NO OTHER
WAY to recover!
--------------------

JodieGR CC Assistant Editor
Date: #1221060 - Wed Mar 08 2006 08:49 PM

THE MEDIA must film the Cafe opening up for business again
tomorrow. Who gives a shit about who does it!
If the Cafe doesn't open, it's a done deal, a dead story.
The store will die; people won't care, they will think it
will be gone for good.
THIS IS VITAL.
You want to know how to be an activist? How to defy and
change the laws???
FOLLOW MARC EMERY'S ADVICE!

JCT: Confess and plead guilty like Marc Emery did.

Don't let grudges get in the way! We HAVE to show the whole
country that Up In Smoke is OPERATIONAL and will NOT be shut
down by a raid.
The Publicity for re-opening after a raid will SAVE you. The
Media filming the doors opening, "Ready for business!" with
perky faces and chipper attitudes will be the ONLY CHANCE of
recovery after a raid. HONESTLY.
Please insist that this happens. It's their ONE CHANCE.
--------------------

Marc Scott Emery  The Prince of Pot
Date: #1221064 - Wed Mar 08 2006 08:57 PM
Quote: Someone tell me why I should support a society that
wants people like us in jail? Give me a reason please.

You're being asked to support Chris and the Up In Smoke Cafe
and its staff. Don't get off track with undirected
bitterness.
----

Marc Scott Emery  The Prince of Pot
Date: #1221082 - Wed Mar 08 2006 09:20 PM

I have asked Chris Lawson to talk to Stephanie and get the
key from her so Chris can re-open the store tomorrow. Chris
L can supervise John if Chris G. is uncomfortable. It is
essential the store re-open tomorrow morning at 11 a.m. as
usual. Media releases have to be sent out announcing
continued activism and defiance. The entire raid is illegal.
There is no warrant. Its a police fishing expedition thats
unlawful. The police were emboldened by the crack house
seizure and decided 'why the fuck not?' and see if they can
get rid of Up In Smoke Cafe in one fell swoop. Difficult
days ahead, but if the Up In Smoke Cafe mail order and store
are to remain viable, then co-operation is essential.
---

Marc Scott Emery The Prince of Pot
Date: #1221089 - Wed Mar 08 2006 09:27 PM

I have spoken with Stephanie. As Chris' most trusted
lieutenant, Stephanie is in charge. She will have Chris
Lawson, Matt Murnagh and John open the store tomorrow. They
will get things in order. Stephanie will continue to handle
paperwork, banking and bill paying. She is prohibited at
this time from being at up In Smoke or being within 2 blocks
of the store.

Chris Goodwin can call the store each day, every couple of
hours if he likes. I think a speaker should be hooked up so
Chris Goodwin can call the store by tomorrow night and have
his words broadcast to the store patrons.

I think there should be pickets outside of Up In Smoke and
the Hamilton Police HQ (where I smoked out the Hammer police
in August 2003) to protest their unlawful and unwarranted
raid. Five pickets in front of the police for several hours
a day would be good. A pamphlet should be made to explain to
all and sundry what has happened, why we fight.

The computer at the store is still there. They took
duplicate drives however. However, what they have seized is
completely unlawful. The police took $100 in cash and the
electronic cash register. We don't know what else is
missing. Any other suggestions people?
---

JodieGR       CC Assistant Editor
Date: #1221104 - Wed Mar 08 2006 09:51 PM

Others will be there! It would be great if you attended. Tim
Meehan, Puff Mama, Alison Myrden, Chris Lawson, are all
showing their support in person.
Here's tonight's homework: Make Free Chris Goodwin banners
and posters. Get signs up outside the store tomorrow
morning. Make it loud and clear that INJUSTICE has been
done. Bring in the media. Show them the clean, safe,
welcoming environment of the Up In Smoke Cafe. Prove that
there's no harm in ANYTHING there.
"We Shall Overgrow", "We Won't Back Down", "Peaceful People
Should Be Safe", "United We Grow", any such slogans should
be made on banners and flags to show defiance, strength,
determination, resolution, faith - BELIEF - in the cause.
--------------------

Marc Scott Emery The Prince of Pot
Date: #1221431 - Thu Mar 09 2006 01:30 PM
Spoke to the crowd via telephone at 4.20 p.m.!
----

Marc Scott Emery The Prince of Pot
CC Online front page story  [Re: Budbabes]
Date: #1221573 - Thu Mar 09 2006 07:41 PM

This our updated front page story at 10.30 p.m. eastern time
Thursday:

The Up In Smoke Cafe at 227 King St. East in Hamilton,
Ontario was raided Wednesday, March 8th by police at about
3.00 p.m. Owner Chris Goodwin was arrested along with three
employees, and taken to Hamilton Police Headquarters.

The charge against Goodwin is possession and trafficking.
Stephanie Spicer ("Bong Pixie" on the CC Forums) is charged
with possession and trafficking in pot cookies. Davin
("Maddchronic" on the CC Forums) and volunteer Steve were
charged with possession.

After the nearby Sandbar Tavern in Hamilton was seized by
police as a "crack house", a plain clothes police officer
entered Up In Smoke. Chris, Davin and a volunteer Steve were
smoking a joint. The plain clothes officer snatched the
joint out of Davin's hand and said "You're all under arrest
for possession of a controlled substance."

Goodwin was led away with Davin and Steve while police
inspected the premises. Police stayed inside the store with
Stephanie Spicer, the assistant manager, for four hours. No
warrant was presented to anyone. The police took the
following without a warrant:

-rental bongs (1 glass hookah,1 G-Bub,3 large bongs,1 small
bong,broken bubbler, assorted spare and broken pieces)
-the hose/whip attatchment for the Pure Vaporizer
-food price list for Puff Mama and Mr.Cookie
-1 full pack regular strength c.chip cookies (Puff Mama)
-baggies of chocolate & small chocolate cups
-back-up disk for computer
-day's reciepts
-phone list
-small postal scale
-all containers/bags of marijuana and about 0.5-1g ground up
weed that was sitting on the counter. Total stash 2 ounces.
-a grinder that had ground up weed in the stash lid
-ExpressPost envelope (I'm not 100% on this but I think I
heard them say that there was a pack of seeds on top of it)
-seed catalouges

Goodwin was held overnight Wednesday and Thursday with a
court appearance on Friday morning for bail. The Crown
Prosecutor is asking that Goodwin be prohibited from using
his store or being at 227 King St. East (Up In Smoke Cafe).
Chris Goodwin has refused those conditions and in
conjunction with Chris' previous charges for possession, its
possible Goodwin could be in jail for some time. All for
passing a joint to friends!His lawyer is Peter Boushy.
Stephanie Spicer's release conditions prohibit her from
going back to the store or within 2 blocks of the premises.

I spoke to Chris Goodwin in the Barton Street Remand Centre
and he is in good spirits. " I was on the news here and all
the inmates are fans, so that is OK. I will not consent to
any bail conditions where I cannot work and operate the
store. I live there, I make my living there, and the
earnings of my employees are made there. It has to stay open
and operating. If I am barred from my store, I have no
purpose, no income, no place to live, and its plain wrong to
prevent me from operating my business."

Chris Goodwin is the most visible and uncompromising
cannabis legalization activist in Ontario. His shop, Up In
Smoke Cafe, had been visited by Hamilton police over 200
times in its 18 month history, and over 30 customers have
been charged with marijuana possession on various visits. Up
In Smoke was selling seeds, bongs, pipes and had a private
lounge for members to smoke and use vaporizers.

We are in contact with Chris Goodwin and the staff of the Up
In Smoke Cafe, and will post more details here as they
become available. To stay up to date, people can call
Stephanie Spicer at 905-518-4132 or 905-574-4131.

The store was open at 11.00 a.m. Thursday morning with Matt
Mernagh, Chris Lawson and John manning positions.

The phone number at Up In Smoke is 905-777-9119.
Customers are urged to visit and donate to the legal defence
fund for the four. Please go to Up In Smoke and buy
merchandise, the Cafe is back!. Cannabis Culture urges
everyone in the movement to visit Up In Smoke Cafe as a
homage to the great courage shown by Chris Goodwin, one of
the pre-eminent cannabis activists in the world. Chris is
one of the great ones, and we cannot let him down now.

Rallies were held Thursday outside of Hamilton police
headquarters. Marc Emery, publisher of Cannabis Culture
Magazine, spoke to the crowd of about 60 people via phone &
amplification at 4.20 p.m. and urged them to protest the
continued custody of Chris Goodwin.
Edited by Marc Scott Emery (Thu Mar 09 2006 07:46 PM)
----

Marc Scott Emery       The Prince of Pot
Date: #1221901 - Fri Mar 10 2006 02:44 PM

Chris Goodwin was released under staggering bail conditions
considering he is charged with possession and possession of
cookies with intent to sell. $5,000 cash bail, can't go
within 200 metres of the store or in the store, must live at
his parents (used to live in the store).
Up In Smoke Cafe IS open though and selling seeds, bongs,
and all other manner of cannabis ephemera. Please visit.
Chris Goodwin will be at the Premiere of ESCAPE TO CANADA
tonight at the Bloor Cinema in Toronto. Say hi to him there
and show up for this great documentary film.
---




--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

>Date: Sat, Mar 11 2006 3:20 am
>Subject: 60 Minutes gives time to pot activist Marc Emery
>From: Gordon Chomway <gordonchom...@...>
>Groups: ca.general, can.politics, van.general,
>wash.general, hfx.general, nf.general, tor.general,
>edm.general, calgary.general

GC: Sharx35 <shar...@...> wrote:
> Agreed. Incompetence is NOT limited to those stoned on
something.

GC: Sharx35! Seeing as John Turmel (a big man in the
"Legalize pot" scene) calls Marc Emery "Marc The Narc"
because "High Times Magazine" (shit, I haven't read that one
in 30 years!) claims that Emery threatens those who complain
about his "seeds" with being arrested,

JCT: I do not call Marc "The Narc" because of threats, I
know nothing about that. I call him the Narc because he
helped cover up Alan Young's involvement in helping the
Crown set aside Terry Parker's Pitt decision which granted
him an extension of the exemption granted by the Ontario
Court of Appeal until the Government has complied with the
court's ruling. Protection forever until access as open and
Alan Young stabbed Parker in the back and Narc Emery covered
it up while continuing to lionize the professeur saboteur.

When Marc Paquette won a new prolongation of exemption form
signed by 1 doctor for exemptees who were having trouble
finding two or three, with Health Canada not informing them,
it was up to Cannabis Culture to announce that exemptees
could now all get extra time to qualify.

And is infamous sheep-dipping in Saskatchewan where he
jumped out of a crowd to confess, and then pled guilty at
trial and lied about it.

Nothing at all to do with shady dealings in seeds.

GC: what kind of a person does that make Marc or Turmel?

JCT: Different, for sure.

GC: I'm laughing at both of them!

JCT: Maybe you're missing some facts?

GC: It must be the dope. How else could there be such a
split in the Peter Tosh "Legalize it" bunch?

JCT: Aha. The fact you are missing. The split is not in the
"legalize it" bunch; it's between Marc the Narc Emery's
"legalize it" bunch and John The Engineer Turmel's "admit
it's already legal" Team.



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: It's sad to see a web site I started up plugging the
Cannabis Vulture, Prince of Rot, Marc The Narc Emery. Marc
Paquette is too forgiving or too forgetful:

>Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 00:53:16 +0000
>From: paquettemarc@... (Marc Paquette)
>Subject: **New*  "Our Prince of Pot Webpage!"
>To: MedPot-discuss@yahoogroups.com

http://medpot.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=33091

>Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 23:34:16 +0000
>From: turmel@... ("John C. Turmel")
>To: MedPot-discuss@yahoogroups.com

> **New* "Our Prince of Pot Webpage!"
> http://medpot.net/forums//index.php?showtopic=33091

Jct: Does it mention how he sat on your Paquette win
of the extension prolongations signed by only one doctor
and let Canada's 600 exemptees hit their expiry dates
without finding out about your win?
Remember the crippled kid in Montreal who had not known?
And does it mention how he killed Parker's Pitt victory
for a permanent exemption and Alan Young helping Crown
Attorney Lara Speirs take it away?
And his jumping out of a crowd to confess and then plead
guilty? Is your page lacking these essential treasonous
acts?

>Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 22:34:59 -0500 (EST)
>From: paquettemarc@... (Marc Paquette)
>Subject: Re: **New*  "Our Prince of Pot Webpage!"
>To: MedPot-discuss@yahoogroups.com

MP: Oh John, don't be such a jealous baby! LOL

JCT: I just asked if you had published how he had betrayed
you? Not your opinion of me for asking.

MP: Sometimes I wonder if you're really in your 50's. Do
they want to extradite John Turmel to U.S. and face life
imprisonment?

JCT: That's all the sheep-dipping needed for you to forgive
his treason to the movement?

MP: This is what this new webpage is all about...Marc
Emery's, Michelle Rainey's and Greg Williams' possible
extradition...nothing else, no one else, and no other
subjects!

JCT: Yes, but Marc, this is the man who squelched the story
of how your Federal Court win could help hundreds? This is
the man who killed the story on the Parker Pitt victory
and Alan Young's stab in the back helping the Crown set
aside Parker's Pitt protection. Throw in the "confess, plead
guilty and lie about it" and I don't see how you can
possibly be party to supporting him.
MP: It has to do about the cause..not necessarily the people
involved.

JCT: Even saboteurs deserve our support?

MP: Besides that, not only John Turmel has his own personal
webpage telling all about himself, his victories, etc, but
our MedPot.net website "Home Page" devotes ALOT about John
Turmel, and we also have a link to Turmel's MedPot-discuss
Yahoo group.

JCT: Supporting me's easy because you know I want to kill
the prohibition and get back to killing usury. Supporting
Emery who has done so much to slow us down can't be right.
No matter who he hangs out with or who is after him, he's a
traitor to the movement and should be shunned as such.

MP: Does Turmel's MedPot-discuss have links for MedPot.net
and MedPot.net Forums?

JCT: Why would I steer people to forums where things I write
might be changed because I was insulting? You know I'd visit
and write more often except for you insistence you'll edit
anything I say you don't like. It's got nothing to do with
who is there, only with as rule I can't live with. I can't
let one group of readers get a different story than another.

MP: You wrote my court cases and I defended myself in all
courts. You were well compensated for your services and I
don't owe you anything! Was John Turmel with me at the
Federal Court of Appeal when I faced the 3 judges?

JCT: No, I was broke and unavailable. Sorry for letting you
down.

MP: Should he have been with me..where was my "coach"?

JCT: As I pointed out, I was so well compensated that I was
broke at the time.

MP: In my eyes, heart and mind, my hero is Terry..period!

JCT: And Marc Emery, we can now all say.

MP: Hey man, that's life, and no one lives old enough to
make everyone happy!

JCT: I'm sure your forgetting his betrayals has made Marc The
Narc happy, if not John The Engineer.

MP: If you don't like what you see John, just don't go there
and let other people read and think what they want. Marc

JCT: I popped over but didn't read anything to not like. I
just asked if his betrayals of you, Terry, the movement were
included. I guess they've been covered up.



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: No defence allowed!

When I got into court for the judge's decision on my
s.601(1) pre-plea Application to Quash the indictment
pursuant to the Krieger invalidation of s.7(1) cultivation
(s.4(1) and s.5(2) by implication) before putting on my
defence, I was pleased to see Ontario Provincial Judge
Pierre Belanger had prepared a written judgment.

I had my Notice of Constitutional Question ready to go at
the last hearing in case he ruled that he thought the law
was still valid and it was ready this time too. Keep in mind
mine is uniquely different than the Parker and Malmo-Levine
constitutional challenges. Parker was the sick guy who used
medical need to win on the Charter "right to life;" Clay, Caine,
Malmo-Levine were the healthy guys who used non-medical
recreational need to lose on the Charter "right to fun;" and
Turmel is the healthy guy trying to use preventative medical
need to win on the Charter "right to life." The threat to the
environment by banning the cannabis mini-tree also violates
my S.7 Charter right to life.

Court File No. 03-20030
                   ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE
                       (Ottawa Region)
Between:
                    Her Majesty the Queen
                                         Respondent/Plaintiff
                             and
                        John C. Turmel
                                            Applicant/Accused
              NOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION
               Pursuant to S.8(2)(a) or of the
                 Constitutional Question Act

TAKE NOTICE THAT on __________ at 10am or so soon thereafter
as can be heard the application to the judge for any Order
abridging the time for service, filing, or hearing of the
application, or amending any defect as to form or content of
the application, or for any Order deemed just; AND FOR

1) a declaration that the provisions of the CDSA prohibiting
marihuana are inconsistent with the Charter and of no force
and effect by virtue of the fundamental freedoms section of
the Constitution Act, 1982 pursuant to S.24(1) of the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I, Schedule A
on the grounds that
a) the prohibition of cannabis hemp marijuana threatens my
right to life under s.7 by denying me the right to use
marijuana for preventative medical purposes and by denying
our society the right to use it for environmental survival
purposes.
b) the Applicant's rights under Section 7 of the Charter are
subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as
can he demonstrably justified in a free and democratic
society and the Applicant says that s.4(1), s.7(1) and
s.5(2) of the CDSA is not a reasonable limit and is not
demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society.

AND TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that in support of the application,
the Applicant will refer any materials this Honourable Court
may allow.
Dated at Ottawa on March 10 2006
John C. Turmel, B. Eng.,

JCT: Judge Belanger
opened explaining that paragraph [4] had the gist of it all:

(4) I am entirely satisfied that the grounds upon which the
application is based have been ruled upon by Courts whose
reasons both bind me and persuade me. I am unable to craft a
decision which is in any way more eloquent or complete in
its analysis than that which as been advanced by counsel for
the Crown. I am not swayed by the applicant's submissions
and entreaties that I decline to abide by the decisions of
hierarchically superior courts. I refuse to do so, both on
principle and because I am in total agreement with them.

[5] The application is dismissed.

JCT: Now that the law had been deemed "not dead" came the
moment to raise whether the law should be struck down as
"bad" again, but for healthy guys who want it for
preventative medical need. The problem is that the trial was
held at the last hearing before the decision on the pre-
trial motion to quash at this hearing.

[6] The accused admits the factual elements of the Crown's
case and has stated that he had no evidence to call. He has
essentially admitted that only this application stands in
the way of a guilty finding. (See transcript of December 15
at p.38). He is consequently found guilty of the charge that
brings him to court.

JCT: Sure I admitted the facts in the trial before the pre-
trial ruling but I still wanted to then use those facts to
challenge the constitutional validity of a prohibition that
denies my right to medical prevention and then use those
facts to argue the necessity defence. But despite my
request:

[7] We will now proceed to a sentencing hearing.
Paul R. Belanger
Senior Justice.




--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: The purported eminence grise of the internet social
credit writers continues to discredit the movement by
vandalising the posts he cannot argue with. Sure must induce
a lot of people to want to speak to him too, not. Maybe
he'll turn his attention to them if they also beat him in
debate.

Anyway, I found out it's a lot easier to complain about his
abuse than I thought:

"To report cases of Usenet abuse, click the "show options"
link in the grey area at the top of the message and select
"Report Abuse." On the report page, describe why you think
the post is abusive."

Jct: So every post has its abuse button to send it along to
the abuse moderator. So every one of my posts that no longer
shows up but has been covered up by Ryan's pissy response
can be quickly sent to the abuse moderator. Someone should
eventually happen since it's a clear abuse. Wouldn't it be
nice to have Ryan banned from posting at Google for his
juvenile, or senile, responses?

By the way, he thinks he's shaming me while I think he's
helping spread a message many people will eventually thank
me for. I couldn't ask for a better plug to bring this
natural miraculous healer to everyone's attention, even if
from a demented lunatic. I'm so not ashamed that I even pee
a mug full and chug it in the DVD put out last year at
http://www.turmelmovie.com so it's not as if I'm not happy
to get the message out. I'm just unhappy to see it cover up
the search results for others.

As Bill Manning pointed out, when you see all the piss post
titles, the articles are not removed, you can still find the
underlying articles if you go into a newsgroup, they only do
not show up in the main Google search page. I wonder if ever
found the page by following my directions instead of his
own.

And you have to admit, all those pissy responses do look
quite demented when you think of how someone can lost their
cool when trying to argue with someone with an engineering
degree. By the way, I've catalogued our debates on money
systems engineering which have driven the old guy around the
bend at http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/ryan00.htm

Just read a few of them to realize why Ryan's not playing
with a full deck as he worked to become speaker of the
Social Credit on-line movement and bring the movement into
disrepute by the fact all the old Socreds have been speaking
with him for years and have not realized he's been driven
completely insane.

Vandalising posts you can't argue with isn't proof of
sanity, is it?

Let's see how long it takes mega-corporation Google to
handle an obvious abuse.




--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: No matter the cause, it's always unnerving going into
court like tomorrow knowing that if things really go badly,
you could be going out by the ass-end of the building in
chains. But would I ever find the warriors to launch a
revolution from the inside. Maybe that's part of the divine
plan.

Judge Belanger's only out is to obey the orders from above
or not. But with the upcoming March 28 Krieger appeal, you
have to wonder why anyone would want to hand down a ruling
on Krieger before then on an historic decision. Who would
want to be the judge to make history by convicting John The
Engineer under an invalid law for trying to legalize the
planet's most important life-sustaining natural resource?
We've seen Judges Doherty, Goudge and Simmons cause the
deaths of over 3000 Canadian epileptics since 28 months ago,
28 months x 30days x 4 epileptic deaths / day = 3360
epileptics deaths that could have been avoided. Scary
numbers.

Now, though Supreme Court Justice Binnie admitted most
judges are rejects from math class, judges are not
unfamiliar with these statistical concepts. Many insurance
cases, the tobacco industry's results, use statistics to
prove extra deaths. You'd almost think that judges who deal
with such matters, as Courts of Appeal all must, would be
experts on statistics of deaths such as how many epileptics
have been lost due to the continued prohibition of their
anti-seizure herb. It's not hard to explain to the average
child so there's no reason that Judges Doherty, Goudge and
Simmons are not aware that they have caused the deaths of
3000 epileptics who could have been saved.

What's really damaging is when you now add in the deaths and
agonies from other diseases that could have been avoided
with access to good, cheap, herbal medication. How many AIDS
deaths could have been avoided if they had all automatically
had access to the cheap herb that would have given them the
munchies to facilitate ingesting the food necessary to
attenuate the effects of 45 pills worth of chemicals a day?
Instead, after their doctors are made to jump through hoops
to get an exemption, they are then left on their own to
obtain it from a black market, now the government's non-
subsidized white market, at high prices most cannot afford.
So the genocide I've witnessed over the past 5 years of my
combat to legalize the world's best herbal medicine has
never been the "oops, sorry," type of error but the by-the-
numbers mechanical murder associated with the biggest such
cases, tobacco, etc.

What possible coercion could make such important
functionaries do such evil? How could anyone let so many
people die while knowing everybody here is watching them do
it? Knowing that the truth has gotten out and has been
recorded on so many computers and sites hasn't hurt? Or
they've been told that the BIA, Banksters' Intelligence
Agency, can use the CIA, KGB, MI5, Mossad, to send out bots
to erase every mention of the dirty deed anywhere in the
world. George Orwell's "down the memory hole."

It is really that simple. It happened to me about 10 years
ago when the National Capital Freenet email director, Paul
Tomblin, and Kia Mennie and her Carleton University Cabal of
juvenile delinquents erased every one of my posts all over
the USENET internet world. Google Groups has done its best
to restructure the early internet days communications but if
you search Google Groups for turmel, you'll notice that all
my posts from the early days are gone. Down the memory hole.
Of course, they copies made on personal computers can't be
erased though they could search your computer when you're
on-line and do a big erase at any time they like. So maybe
the genocide functionaries have been promised a "cleaned
record" for posterity? Who cares if the media haven't
reported it, it'll be wiped out someday. Or they have
something being held over all their heads or they're just
scared. Whatever, it must be one incredibly great coercion
for them to let so many people die.

But then again, you get the odd good judge. I can't say
there haven't been any good judges, there have. And then
there are the minor wins like the 4000 stays. They can be
beaten. Even if the media hide the story, they can't hide
the results.  Otherwise, why would I keep trying?

What some people resent is that I not only shoot at minor
wins but spectacular major ones too. Abolish prohibition to
end the genocide of the sick. Abolish interest to end the
genocide of the poor. Abolish prohibition on gambling to end
the genocide of the mind through lotteries. And after half a
dozen busts, they got tired and I can now play poker in
Canada. They're getting tired with the marijuana challenges
cluttering up the courts and ruining a lot of judges
reputations. Meet a judge at a party and ask: "How many
people that you convicted while you didn't believe the law
was dead still have their invalid criminal records from your
bogus convictions?" Ask the same to the Crown Attorneys. Ask
the same to the Defence attorneys. The whole judicial
establishment screwed up, are still screwing up, and it's
being covered up for the booboisie.

Anyway, no matter how bad it ever gets, the whole world is
fixable and savable in the twinkling of the eye with the
switch of a diskette to restrict the banks' computers to a
pure service charge, rake-off, and abolish the interest
charge. With enough money, maximum industrial capacity at
maximum engineering will be achieved and we'll see if we
have the power to pull out of our nose dive to environmental
catastrophe.

Just like in bridge where you position yourself to lead your
Queen through your right-hand opponent's King to your Ace
and find out your left-hand opponent had it all along and
and you lose, so too in real life survival, positioning
ourselves to exert maximum industrial power can still lead
to destruction if we're already past the point of no return.

But like the good bridge player, you do position yourself to
win when you can and we can position ourselves to save
ourselves if we can. We go from enslaved industrial capacity
off target (destruction) to full throttle on target
(production) and see if we not only survive but turn the
sewers of the old era controlled by the banksters families
into the gardens of the new era controlled by the interest-
free banking software program: UNILETS behind Millennium
Declaration Resolution C6 to Governments.

And of course, with UNILETS interest-free credit cards,
corporations threatened by the commercial uses of the
cannabis tree can retool and join the industrial boom
building tractors, not tanks.

I'd bet that we'll only win the cannabis war at the same
time they'll be ready to let us win the financial war. But
I'm gaining on both fronts right about now. What with
Venezuela's Chavez being the first national leader in the
world to set up an interest-free banking system to copy and
better the results of the interest-free social currency that
only saved Argentina but got their IMF-World Bank debt paid
off 2 years early? How long do you think it's going to take
for more national leaders to emerge to follow at paying off
their debts more quickly and all becoming rich through
social currency banking?

Eden's a lot closer than anyone would think and for the past
quarter century I've seen Heaven on the horizon that's just
a switch of a disk away.

So I have no idea what tomorrow will bring but
1) the ruling on the Krieger Quash could always be delayed
pending the upcoming one from the higher court, h if d
tomorrow,
2) the ruling could declare Krieger supreme
3) the ruling could declare the law still alive so my trial
should continue.

I would then ask to file my constitutional challenge, unique
from Parker who won as a sick guy for medical need and from
Clay-Malmo-Levine who lost as healthy guys who wanted it for
recreation. I'm a healthy guy who wants it for medical
prevention, not recreation, engaging the right to life the
lesser Clay-Malmo-Levine cases did not raise.

If dismissed, then it would proceed to trial where I'd lose
and be sentenced. Possibly 5 years in jail. And remember, I
never got an election to give this court jurisdiction.

Then I'd file an appeal on the medical prevention, Krieger
issues since I don't want to win on a technicality at that
point. I once didn't dropped a cinch technicality in my
Casino Turmel appeal (Bingo) so I could argue the merits.
Same here. If the Court of Appeal don't grant my application
for certiorari and Judge Belanger insists on exercising
jurisdiction though I had too much under the section used,
then there would be purpose in striking down the conviction
on that technical point and I'd drop it.

Imagine how the Ottawa would explain it to the censored
citizens of Ottawa, the notorious Ottawa native John Turmel
jailed for Ottawa stunt they suppressed. Of course, an
acquittal also makes the news.

Still, facing jail always unnerving, what with a
provincial byelection coming up on March 30.



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

>Article #3886 (3887 is last):
>From: bo774@... (Kelly Bert Manning)
>Newsgroups: alt.fan.john-turmel,can.politics,can.legal,
>alt.drugs,sci.econ,sci.engr,alt.conspiracy
>Date: 4 Mar 2006 20:13:22 GMT
>Subject: once again pot use interferes with google use Re:
TURMEL: Ryan still vandalizing posts after losing debate

John Turmel (bc726@...) writes:

BM: That he still can't do a successful vanity search on his
own usenet posts. Turmel's complete usenet ouvre, such as it
is, appears to be available via google at
http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?enc_user
=Pb2epRkAAAAy_TpKCCRnvRnIUfAhG2edFHEpkZv4Xc_LrosBM8FB-
g&hl=en

JCT: I never said my complete list of posts wasn't
available at Google. I said that the post titles had been
over-ridden by Ryan's automated response in the main google
search page. He didn't find the problem page.

BM: Turmel's pot saturated mental state of anxiety,
confusion, and paranoia still leaves him unable to submit an
elementary search such as:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=group%3Acan.legal+author%3
Aturmel&start=0&scoring=d&num=10&hl=en&lr=&as_drrb=q&as_qdr
=m&as_mind=1&as_minm=1&as_miny=1981&as_maxd=4&as_maxm=3&as_
maxy=2006&safe=off&

JCT: Har har har. With this elementary search, he found...
And he had to ended up in a specific can.legal group after
I'd told him the problem was seen in the listings of the
overview page when you go to google.com and click on
Groups then search for "turmel" then sort on date. Of
course, the problem won't show up if he's looking in the
wrong place. . So it sounds like Bert doesn't partake of
miracle herb. Yet, the U. of Saskatchewan study recently
showed that cannabis generates new brain cells which would
explain why I'm so sharp and Bert's so dull, dull enough not
to have been able to follow some pretty simple instructions
to find the right problem page. Reminds me of the drunk
looking for his car keys under the lightpost because that
was where he could see. Har har har har.

BM: Hmm, could it possibly be that I have managed to best
"the Engineer" in a debate about whether his posts have been
"vandalized" in any way?

JCT: No, more likely Bert can't follow instructions very
well. As I explained, when I go to google.com and click on
Groups then search for "turmel" then sort on date, I get:

John Turmel drinks his own piss.
can.politics - Mar 6, 5:13 pm by w_b_r...@... - 2
messages - 2 authors

John Turmel drinks his own piss.
can.politics - Mar 4, 12:21 pm by Hayek Von Mises Redux - 7
messages - 7 authors

John Turmel drinks his own piss.
alt.fan.john-turmel - Mar 3, 11:22 am by w_b_r...@...
- 3 messages - 2 authors

JCT: I wonder how Bert could have gummed up the instructions
to end up in can.legal when I had explained the sabotage was
in the overview page. No wonder he can't see the problem, he
can't find the right page we're talking about. The problem
page he can't find but the non-problem page he can find.

BM: As for Turmel v. Ryan, it seems to be a classic example
of Pot, Kettle, Black. One chronic usenet abuser accusing
another usenet abuser of abuse.

JCT: Bert Manning thinks my thoughts are an abuse. Bet he
favors censorship if some thoughts are an abuse.

>>Subject: proof that pot impairs one's ability to search
> google groups Re: TURMEL: Bill Ryan still vandalizing posts
>>From: Kelly Bert Manning b...@...
>>Date: Tues, Feb 28 2006 9:56 pm
>>Groups: alt.fan.john-turmel, can.politics, can.legal,
> alt.drugs, sci.econ, sci.engr, alt.conspiracy
> JCT: Doing searches is so hard. I wonder what he thinks I
> did wrong?

BM: You saturated your mind with pot and assumed that a lack
of results couldn't possibly be caused by any failure on
your part in supplying search criteria.

JCT: I wasn't talking about my failure of supplying search
criteria, I was talking about your failure when follow
specific search criteria at the opening page.

BM: In this case a Problem Exists Between the Keyboard And
the Chair used for this particular search of your's, not
with the content of google's archive, or with anything Ryan
has done.

JCT: Of course he'd think this way if he hasn't found the
problem page I pointed us to.

BM: I realize that Tax time has come around again, but you
will not be able to deduct anything for your contributions
to the sterotype of a mentally confused pot head making
ridiculous claims about his own cognitive ability.

JCT: He sure is insulting for the guy who couldn't find the
right page. Har har har har.

BM: I suggest Turmel take a lesson from Emily Litella and
end his embarrasment by saying "Never mind".

JCT: No, I'll end by pointing out to Bert that he'll never
find the problem page I pointed us to if he insists on
following his own directions.

And I've sent along a complaint to the google groups abuse
department:

On Feb 20 William B Ryan admitted setting up a script to
auto post a response of whenever it detects a post from John
Turmel.

- Show quoted text -

>Article 177448 of can.legal:
>Path:
ncf.ca!news.kjsl.com!news.glorb.com!postnews.google.com!i39g2000cwa.googleg=roup\
s.com!not-for-mail
>From: w_b_r...@...
>Newsgroups:
can.legal,alt.drugs,sci.econ,sci.engr,alt.conspiracy
>Subject: John Turmel drinks his own piss.
>Date: 25 Feb 2006 03:02:50 -0800
>Organization: http://groups.google.com
>Lines: 27
>Message-ID:
<1140865370.887328.318...@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
>References: <dtobfh$jf...@...>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.219.196.53
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>X-Trace: posting.google.com 1140865375 30235 127.0.0.1 (25
Feb 2006 11:02:55 GMT)

John Turmel drinks his own piss.

Lest anyone suspect that this is intended by me to be
an egregious insult to this one man freakshow, he
proudly announced yesterday to the twenty or thirty
USENET lists he routinely spams that he does so:-
http://www.geocities.com/w_b_ryan/turmel-urine.txt
--------------------------
JCT: And yet, despite arguments between today's
practitioners, yesteryear's practitioners had little
else to use as a powerful disinfectant and curative.
They had to know what I have experienced...

"Emmanuel Konig, of Basel, in his book The Animal
Kingdom (1683) recommended drinking one's urine to
heal heartburn, depression, gout, toothaches, colic,
jaundice, and high fevers. Daniel Bockher, a German
physician, in 1622 published a popular work titled
Medicus Microcosmos. It praises the healing properties
of urine, excrement, lice, sperm, tapeworms, and ear
wax."

JCT: I can attest it works for my heartburn! I went
from one roll of Rolaids per week to two rolls per
year! nvalid.

- end quoted text -

If you search google groups for "turmel" sorted on date, you
can see that Ryan's automated piss responses show up rather
than the original article title. Is it possible to delete
the abuse responses or ban Mr. Ryan's posts from appearing
at google usenet groups?



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

>Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 16:15:34 +0000
>From: lesleytimebanksusa@... (Lesley Jones)
>Subject: TIMEBANK Messages
>To: turmel@...

LJ: Dear Mr. Turmel: Please only post TimeBanking related
information to this site. It is not a place to air your
grievances or spam others about non-related articles and
issues of your own wide array of interests.

JCT: Sorry, I have your group in an alias with timebankuk
and ijccr and posted because the problem arose out of the
debate on money reform.

LJ: I have written you two times before to ask you to please
consider the nature of your posts, and choose accordingly
which ones to send to this list-serve.

JCT: I don't recall ever receiving such warnings before
since my posts are almost, other than this recent abuse,
about timebanking systems engineering.

LJ: If it becomes necessary to ask you once again to not
post unrelated material, we may choose to remove you from
this list serve.

JCT: Excuse me but since almost all my posts have been
censored here anyway, I didn't think anyone would notice a
two only mildly related posts among all those very relevant
posts which were rejected. How may of my timecurrency-
related postings have you not let through? Since last August
2005:

http://yahoogroups.com/group/TimeBanking/messages/2047

2047 LETS in Brazil has dangerous feedback Sep 27, 2005
2048 Japan Timetrading by Seniors Cooperative Sep 27, 2005

JCT: That's two posts in September a nd then every other
post for the rest of the year was censored. These are
December's important posts that were not let through from
http://yahoogroups.com/group/letssc/messages

DECEMBER 2005
1922 Italian Center for Monetary Studies off base 12/8
1923 #4 Argentina's Provincial Bonds discontinued 12/8
1931 Running in Guinness 60th election, not with the Greens 12/21
1932 UNILETS is an incredible-concept.com 12/21
1933 #2 UNILETS is an incredible-concept.com 12/22
1934 World Social Currency at 2006 Forum in Venezuela 12/23
1935 Venezuela's Hugo Chavez for LETS Social Currency 12/23
1936 Contacting Hugo Chavez on Sociable Currencies 12/25
1937 Michael Day's Venezuela Journal Report 12/29
JANUARY 2006
1940 Invite to Hugo Chavez for social currency lecture 1/1
1948 Venezuela could bank the global economic game 1/7

JCT: This one got through no Jan 8 as timebanking #2158

1961 No WSF social currency lecture listed; Kennedy's heaven 1/14
1962 Dempsey class action banking suit off-target 1/14
1981 Michael Fighting White Berets finally support LETS? 1/24
1982 Social Credit: not Socialism, not a political party 1/25
1983 Beyond the LETS solution. 1/25
FEBRUARY 2006
1986 Google reports on Social Currencies at WSF 2006 2/6
1987 #2 Google reports on Social Currencies at WSF 2006 2/6

JCT: Only post #2 got through as timebanking #2196, not the
original post. I wonder what the readers thought when they
received part 2 but never got part 1?

1988 Davos draws media away from World Social Forum 2/6

JCT: This one got through as timebanking #2198.

1990 Failure to use poker chip model causes errors 2/6
1991 Argentina Massive Debt Paid Off Two Years Early 2/6
1994 2006 World Social Forum UNILETS Report 2/7

JCT: These two got through as timebanking #2194 and #2197.

2000 UNILETS is Thomas More's Utopia with 1/s accounting
2/12
2002 Madron & Jopling Gaian Democracies no Utopia 2/12
2003 Time as Money is a Golden Idea? 2/12

JCT: And finally, this one got through as timebanking #2203

2004 UNILETS is an incredible-concept.com 2/13
2005 H.G. Wells' Open Conspiracy for Heaven 2/15
2008 SunMoney: A new Combination Economy NOT 2/19
2009 Bill Ryan forces correction of great mistake! 2/19
2010 #2 SunMoney: A new Combination Economy NOT 2/21
2019 Exciting IJCCR Sun Money debates turn to Ducknipples 2/26
2020 Bill Ryan obsessed by urine therapy 2/26
2022 Difference between house and money assets 2/28
2023 Bill Ryan still vandalizing posts 2/28

JCT: All the other posts were censored except that the last
two censored posts about Bill Ryan's abuse has now brought
this recent threat to ban me because some of my rejected
posts have been slightly off-topic.

LJ: Is this clear? Do you have any questions about this
directive?

JCT: What? So you're setting up your pretext for excluding
me out of the group from which you have censored the grand
majority of my posts? Since you aren't going to censor it
like you censor most of my other posts, why is it so
important to you? Two non-related posts ever and you're on
my back after suppressing all those posts. Sure, your intent
is clear about your dictate. It's just too bad you can't put
your warning on the group, typical of you censors.

LJ: We appreciate your comments about monetary systems and
the like,

JCT: With such a high censorship rate, that's unlikely. Is
there anyone else who has had such a high rejection rate? Or
is it only me because no one else has ever had their
postings rejected?

LJ: and hope that you will choose to continue to participate
in discussions of economics and related topics, as they
relate to TimeBanking. Thank you,
Lesley Jones Moderator TimeBanks USA

JCT: If you're responsible for all the censorship, you
should ashamed of yourself for focusing on something that
finally may warrant being rejected for slight relevance.

From the moderator who has censored so many of my relevant
posts, the malicious intent comes out loud and clear. I
won't be posting anything more about pseudo-Socred Pissant
Bill Ryan any more but I'd certainly like to hear what other
two posts I was warned about and why they were more
objectionable than the other posts that you censored.



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

JCT: Good news. Sounds like there is a good chance that the
invalidation of the law (Parker or Krieger) is just around
the corner if Marc the Narc is now telling us the law has
been dead all along!

>P.E.I. judge frees man on pot possession
>Date: #486375 - Fri Mar 14 2003 11:58 AM

JCT: A 2003 topic to take the first misleading step:

>From: Marc Scott Emery   The Prince of Pot
>Date: #1219723 - Sun Mar 05 2006 08:51 PM

JCT: The latest latest update from the Prince of Rot.

EMERY: On July 31, 2000, the Ontario court of Appeal gave
the Canadian federal government 365 days to craft a new law
that adequately incorporated into law a medical marijuana
access law that conformed to an OCA court order OR THERE
WOULD BE NO FORCE OR EFFECT to SECTION 4(c) of the
Controlled Drugs & Substances Act (ie. marijuana possession)

JCT: True that Section 4(c) is not alive! It never was.
We're talking about s.4(1).

EMERY: 364 days later, Health Canada makes minor amendments
to its regulations. In a decision entitled Hitzig vs.
Regina, it was shown that Health Canada had not adequately
met the court ordered standard.

EMERY: That meant that there was no possession law in
effect? I went across Canada getting arrested that summer to
demonstrate that there was in fact no marijuana law."

JCT: So when the MMAR did not adequately meet the standard,
366 days later was the very first day of cannabis freedom
after Turmel's countdown to Aug 1 2001, Terry Parker Day
when there was no law and Marc Emery went across Canada. In
2003, two years later. And based on the J.P. ruling which
was later overturned while not on based on Parker's Pitt
ruling from a year earlier on Mar 15 2002 that said the MMAR
had not complied with the court's ruling and was vindicated.

Where was our stalwart hero for two years while the law was
dead pursuant to Justice Pitt's Parker Order? Not only did
he know about Pitt, he suppressed its report in Cannabis
Culture and the report on how Alan Young helped Lara Speirs
trick Terry out of is Pitt protection.

EMERY: In Prince Edward Island, I was NOT arrested in
Charlottetown as this court ruling showed that in PEI, a
judge had ruled there was no marijuana law.

By October 2003, courts in BC, Ontario, Nova scotia, Prince
Edward Island had ruled there was no marijuana law in force
or effect.

On October 7, 2003, the Ontario Court of Appeal returned
with a decision that reinstated the previously struck down
section.

JCT: And told all those inferior tribunals they were wrong
to have proceeded pursuant to the Interpretation Act.

The OCA AGREED with the interpretation of the lower courts
in four provinces, that there was no possession law for
marijuana, from July 31, 2001 to October 7, 2003. Then, in
explicably, the OCA brought back what was just hailed in the
same decision as a dead law. How a court has the authority
to reinstate laws it has declared void is unanswered.

JCT: That's the Turmel Torpedo now being shot in the Ontario
courts.

EMERY: Parliaments are entrusted with making laws, courts
can only, as far as I have ever seen, rule on their
constitutionality and the fairness of application. So to
this day, I believe that lawfully, there is no possession of
marijuana law. However, no judge has yet agreed to this.

JCT: Every time I've gotten close to winning big, one of the
Judas Goat Team pops up to claim credit. Remember how we
were just a week away from getting the "MMAR failed to save
the CDSA prohibition" Lederman decision and suddenly the
J.P. case arises saying the prohibition fell not because the
MMAR had failed but because, whether it had failed or not,
it had been wrongly re-legislated, later rejected, but which
has clouded the issue since then. The J.P. decision got the
credit for what Parker, I and Paquette had asked for.

So after two years of the Young-Emery cabal's narc moles all
screaming Turmel was irresponsible for telling people the
law was dead, now Marc the Narc has positioned himself as
the man who thought the law was invalid all along.

He just did nothing about it, that's all.

Until now. So what's going to happen that needs him ready to
claim he knew the law was dead all along?



--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

>Subject: proof that pot impairs one's ability to search
google groups Re: TURMEL: Bill Ryan still vandalizing posts
>From: Kelly Bert Manning b...@...
>Date: Tues, Feb 28 2006 9:56 pm
>Groups: alt.fan.john-turmel, can.politics, can.legal,
alt.drugs, sci.econ, sci.engr, alt.conspiracy

John Turmel (b...@...) writes:
> JCT: I can imagine how embarrassing it must be for Bill
> Ryan  to have to keep backing down from my bets to put his
> money  where is mouth is all these years and so his only
> recourse  was to resort to vandalism.

BM: This only appears to have happened in the pot saturated
personal "reality" you inhabit. It is odd that a self
identified "engineer" can't manage to do a successful vanity
search on his own usenet posts.

JCT: Doing searches is so hard. I wonder what he thinks I
did wrong?

> If you Google Groups, you'll notice that all my latest
> posts  have been retitled "John Turmel drinks his own
> piss." Today's post "Difference between money and assets"
> no longer shows up in a search and has been covered over
> by Ryan's internet graffiti.

It appears that you have no ability to use google. Perhaps
you should leave it alone, since your confused understanding
of how to use it causes you so much unfounded anxiety.
See: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.john-
turmel/browse_frm/thread/... QED.

JCT: I didn't say to go to alt.fan.john-turmel which shows
the complete list of my posts. Yes, if I had been unable to
find my posts there, I would be confused.

BM> My appologies to Mssr. Ryan

JCT: Bert Manning is apologizing to Ryan who vandalized my
posts because I couldn't find my posts in one particular
usenet newsgroup? That's all it takes to make vandalism okay
in Bert Manning's opinion?

BM: for interfering with the pot assisted state of paranoia
"The Banking Systems Engineer" has worked himself into. I
expect that Ryan was amused by Turmel's bizarre and easily
disproved claims.

JCT: Is Bert talking about Ryan's failure to disprove my
claims on banking systems engineering which caused him to
resort to vandalism in frustration? How many people do you
think he's going to engage in discussion when word gets
around about what he does when he loses the debate?

Or is Bert talking about disproving that Ryan has been
vandalising my posts? If so, I never said that my posts
couldn't be found if you went to a specific newsgroup, I
said it could not be found if you ask for an overview of
google groups for "Turmel," not in alt.fan.john-turmel.

Try it. Google Groups for turmel, sort on date, and tell me
if the list you see is the same list from my group? When you
ask for the overview, all you see is the title of the latest
response to my posts, Ryan's piss posts, instead of the real
thing underneath. Of course, someday, Ryan's piss posts will
be a joke, to think that someone of Ryan's age would resort
to such juvenile tactics because he couldn't handle the
debate. Mr. Social Credit theory vandalises when he loses.

BM: I find it rather ironic that one usenet graffiti
perpetrator

JCT: I get the insult that my words are offensive waste.

BM: can manage to work himself into such a mentally confused
state of paranoia and anxiety over the actions of someone
engaging in a very similar form of usenet abuse.

JCT: Bert thinks my words are as bad an internet abuse as
Ryan's vandalism. At least he has the guts to make it
official for internet posterity that The Engineer mis-saw
the list of posts at my group.

BM: Isn't there honour among usenet abusers?

JCT: Again, Bert equates my creation of ideas with Ryan's
hiding of words. Anyway, Bert's made it official. He now
approves of the vandalism he originally complained of.

I pray to the souls in the Gaia who would have lived had I
won earlier to send down a curse of three standard
deviations worth of bad luck on both these evil minds.

And of course, to blame mental weakness on pot after I've
posted the recent research by Saskatchewan university which
indicates cannabis promotes the growth of new brain cells
goes to show why I'm so sharp and Bill and Bert are so dull.

I've only ever done it once before but it may be time to
call the RCMP in again. As the leader of a Canadian
political party, I called them in the last time my posts
were vandalised years ago and they got the ISP to ban the
abuser. Writing to Google hasn't seemed to work even with
the evidence that Ryan has a bot doing is automated sabotage
for him. If it doesn't stop soon, real soon, we'll see if
the RCMP can get better results.

Hear that, old man. You may be an American but you can still
help set new world-wide internet law. Bill Ryan, making the
news as a sore loser and vandal to boot.

And Bert, you've now earned a role in the "Turmel" rock
opera too.

--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

For some reason, the Ontario Crown prepares our appeal books
but the Crown in Alberta won't for Max Cornelssen.

Pierre Drouin and Real Martin just got theirs in preparation for
their appeal on March 28 with us.

Time to let the cat out of the bag. Pierre received his exemption
and will be complaining about Doherty's decision that everyone gets
busted and the judges will decide who gets off.




--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics

From: bc726@... (John Turmel)
Newsgroups:
sci.engr,sci.econ,alt.fan.john-turmel,can.politics,alt.drugs,alt.con
spiracy,can.legal
Subject: Re: Can the John Turmel rant be removed
Date: 2 Mar 2006 16:28:30 GMT

"Harland" (harland0406@...) writes:
> Is someone just spamming?...is that what the John Turmel msgs are
> about...?
> Its pathetic...How about the moderator taking some action ...please
> Harland

Jct: I've explained before that re-engineering the financial
system belong before engineers as rightly as before economists.
But since I force harland to read my posts, or since  my posts
are so irresistable that they must be read, out come those who
need a censor to take the place of the willpower they don't have.

All you have to do is not read it.
Why does it have to removed?

--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics