Making sure im on the right path.

HD: go back several posts. There is mention of an Earth Ship and something to do with the Kyoto (accord?). Lol, I don't know wtf an earth ship is either but I admit: there's a lot I "don't know" about.

It might be a full moon. FFS, I actually had a dream last night about ODF. That can't be good, lol.
 
I volunteer for food banks and the like because i was going there to get my basic needs, i suffered low points in my life, but its those places that allowed me to continue. Without them, i would not be here most likely, therefor i find it very fitting that i must do what i can to repay a debt that can never be repayed.

Earthships...

Earthship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Its a type of house...not a damn ufo or spaceship....honestly, no one ever heard of wikipedia?

Earthships was certified by governments that they exceed the Kyoto Guildelines. You know that agreement between nations to reduce gas emissions and to actively search for more efficient energies?

Kyoto Protocol - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Thank you for providing the Wikipedia Link. I'm positive that most of us are completely unfamiliar with Earth Ships.

Sorry, I should not "speak" for "most of us." Perhaps there are more people out there than I realize who are knowledgable re: Earth Ships and the Kyoto Accord. If so, my apologies..
 
Last edited:
Guilty as charged ;) I certainly don't know 'everything'

To HD, thanks for the laugh re: "WTF is an earth ship???

I guess living in the real world has tainted my perspective on reality."
 
SynGreis said:
I volunteer for food banks and the like because i was going there to get my basic needs, i suffered low points in my life, but its those places that allowed me to continue. Without them, i would not be here most likely, therefor i find it very fitting that i must do what i can to repay a debt that can never be repayed.

Earthships...

Earthship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Its a type of house...not a damn ufo or spaceship....honestly, no one ever heard of wikipedia?

Earthships was certified by governments that they exceed the Kyoto Guildelines. You know that agreement between nations to reduce gas emissions and to actively search for more efficient energies?

Kyoto Protocol - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

I had no idea what an earthship is....now I do....if that is what you want, whatever floats your boat.

As for Kyoto, I know about it...I know we aren't participating in it either, but it isn't like I want to get into a big philosopical/environmental debate.....

Anyway, you will need to find a means of earning an income. You ex will likely spin your volunteer work as you being completely capable of earning an income, but refuse to work. The courts will likely impute an income to you equal to either a) what someone with your education/qualications/experience can make, or failing that b) full time minimum wage. This is standard, and it is completely appropriate. You will then be obligated to pay c/s and s7 on this amount, whether or not you are actually earning such amount. Again, this is completely standard (although some may say harsh).

You may have all the good intentions in the world, but you now have a child and have responsibilities to that child. You will need to find a way to provide for that child, because from what I've read so far, you are using volunteer work and environmentalism as reasons you aren't working. If you go to court with this, you better hope you have one hell of an enviro-socialist judge that is sympathic to your cause, or otherwise....it won't end well.
 
hadenough said:
SynGreis on a personal note re: "i actively took part in volunteering such as food banks, homeless shelters, thrift shops" - that is very kind and generous of you and I really do mean that.
Click to expand...
I disagree. It is not generous if it is lieu of working to support yourself and using it as a rationalization for not working on the books and paying taxes. I also wonder how, "in the boonies" with no vehicle and without being able to work because he can't eat enough due to his ingrown toenail, he is able to muster the energy to voluteer.

I DO put in volunteer hours in my community. I work beside dozens of people who also do this, and who, like me, manage to work at real jobs and support our real families and pay our real taxes.

Hammerdad, an "earthship" is a house built to exist off the grid. It's next generation "Survivalist" mentality, with a Green wallpaper over top. In his comment about this he was also complaining that he can't a government grant to pay for it.

He also seems to be following the ridiculous anti-taxation philosophy of people like Eddie Kahn . The idea is that governments can't tax us because they have no jurisdiction.

The OP is suggesting he got the CRA to agree that he exists in a geographic area that isn't in it's jurisdiction, and he has letters to prove it, only he can't show them to us because they are so easy to fake.

SynGreis, you are cherry picking vague observations of real life and constructing a fantasy world where you able to do what you want. That's great. You won't get anywhere in court with this.

Tell the Family Court Judge that they only have jurisdiction over the coasts and streams.

You must be joking that you didn't come to a legal forum for legal advice.

And by the way, Canada is not a Republic.
 
Mess said:
He also seems to be following the ridiculous anti-taxation philosophy of people like Eddie Kahn . The idea is that governments can't tax us because they have no jurisdiction.
Click to expand...

Are you implying mess that the poster in question is possibly a OPCA litigant? I was starting to get this impression as well:

Judge refutes 'idiotic' claims

OPCA litigants typically follow "gurus" who promote and sell techniques to unlock secret accounts and evade traffic tickets, support payments or taxes by undermining governments, corporations and individuals, Rooke says.
Click to expand...

http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f7/judge-fights-take-legal-system-back-13214/

Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571 (CanLII)
Date: 2012-09-18
Docket: 4803 155609
URL: CanLII - 2012 ABQB 571 (CanLII)
Citation: Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571 (CanLII)

[532] The mythology behind the ‘A4V’ scheme is extremely peculiar, and requires travel into the conspiratorial and demon-haunted shadow world of the OPCA community. Aspects of this scheme are explained in reported U.S. cases, including: United States v. Heath, 525 F.3d 451 (6th Cir. 2008); United States v. Anderson, 353 F.3d 490, 500 (6th Cir. 2003), certiorari denied, 541 U.S. 1068 (2004); United States v. Oehler, 2003 WL 1824967 (D. Minn. Apr. 2, 2003), affirmed, 116 Fed. Appx. 43 (8th Cir. 2004); United State v. Eddie Ray Kahn et al., No. 1:08‑cr‑00271‑RCL‑1 (U.S.D.C. D.C. May 26, 2010). As I understand it, A4V’s guru promoters claim that each person is associated with a secret government bank account which contains millions of dollars. The exact sum varies from guru to guru. The bank account’s number is usually related to some identification number assigned to a person by the state, such as a Social Security Number, a Social Insurance Number, or a birth certificate number. The specific details of that relationship also seem to vary between A4V schemes.
Click to expand...

Good Luck!
Tayken
 
Republic of Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

still in effect and also the Doj...err sorry MoJ recognized it but cannot comment.

Was declared and also still in effect.

when i volunteer, they also provide meals for breaks. You never really volunteered for those organizations huh?

"He also seems to be following the ridiculous anti-taxation philosophy of people like Eddie Kahn . The idea is that governments can't tax us because they have no jurisdiction."

When did i say i protest the taxes. Like i said before, I am a registered Non-Resident with the books of Immigration AND CRA. Have you bothered to look at article 13 of the Income Tax Act. HE continued to claim he was a US Citizen. Bad move.

here is a part of article 13, the part where it is relevant, but i encourage you to view the entire thing.

Income Tax Act
PHP: 
Application of Part XIII tax where payer or payee is a partnership

(13.1) For the purposes of this Part, other than section 216,

(a) where a partnership pays or credits an amount to a non-resident person, the partnership shall, in respect of the portion of that amount that is deductible, or that would but for section 21 be deductible in computing the amount of the income or loss, as the case may be, referred to in paragraph 96(1)(f) or 96(1)(g) if the references therein to “a particular place” and “that particular place” were read as references to “Canada”, be deemed to be a person resident in Canada;

(a.1) where a partnership pays, credits or provides to a non-resident person an amount described in subsection (5.1), the partnership is deemed in respect of the amount to be a person; and

(b) where a person resident in Canada pays or credits an amount to a partnership (other than a Canadian partnership within the meaning assigned by section 102), the partnership shall be deemed, in respect of that payment, to be a non-resident person.

in order for this to be in effect you must have this document in place....

NR301 - Declaration Of Eligibility For Benefits Under A Tax Treaty For A Non-Resident Taxpayer

The big difference i did and this kahn guy didn't, is the change of status.

here is more info on rights for non-residents or non-nationals....

Declaration on the Human Rights of Individuals Who are not Nationals of the Country in which They Live, G.A. res. 40/144, annex, 40 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 53) at 252, U.N. Doc. A/40/53 (1985).

Country is defined also by a state. What is our equivalent of state over here....Province....Where was i born???Quebec.....Have i been deemed a threat to national security????Nope.

If you REALLY want me to send over documents about CRA i can.
 
tayken one step ahead of you..

Dennis Larry Meads - Freeman Alberta - Dean Clifford discusses - YouTube

another another link.

Ucadia: OPCA Explained – Why a most recent opinion by the Queen’s Bench in Canada exposes the Secret Bar Guilds as the most radical and dangerous anti-social and anti-law group in the world

frank ocollins absolutely ripped this justice apart, that the justice had to retract and revise his judgment because of prejudice. In court prejudice exercised at that amount is enough to getnthat judge thrown in the brig/jail.
 
SynGreis said:
tayken one step ahead of you..
Click to expand...

Really? How? I am a strong opposer to "lunatic" and "vexatious" OCPA litigants who waste the court's time. Are you too?

I am a staunch advocate for the conduct of "vexatious" OCPA litigants to face criminal fines and incarceration resulting from their conduct.

Mess, I believe your suspicions have been confirmed regarding this poster.

SynGreis: You will find very little support from members of this forum in my honest opinion for your "lunatic" ideas to quote the article provided in a previous post. In fact, you will find probably strong opposition to OCPA concepts in my opinion.

(a) I do not support, agree or encourage anyone to attempt to deploy OCPA concepts and strategies before any court of competent jurisdiction in Canada.

(b) I encourage people who may feel that OCPA conduct is acceptable to seek proper legal counsel from a governed barrister and solicitor registered with the Law Society of Canada.

(c) I encourage our justice system to consider under the Criminal Code of Canada the conduct of OCPA litigants to be fraudulent and criminal in nature.
 
Last edited:
i never said i shared my beliefs, you post the justice rooke judgment to which was completely irrelevant which he ignored protocol and made a judgment based on what he BELIEVED was true and discriminated him and profiled him.

I have never filed any "bogus" or "frivolous" documents into the record and everything i have done in RELATION TO THE SUBJECT has been in conformity of the family law rules and the act and the children law reform rules and act.

I also have NEVER claimed to be a OCPA litigant. It is also worth mentioning, that judges and lawyers have a VESTED interest in keeping people ignorant of the law so they make more money and judges can get more cases. Its like an oil company admitting that alternative fuels such as magnetic energy, zero point energy and others are more efficient then theirs and thus should not buy their oil anymore. they will go out of business.

So again, lets remain focused on the SUBJECT MATTER. and that was me asking for procedural questions. My beliefs whatever they are is my own personal business. It would be greatly appreciated if they can be respected.
 
SynGreis said:
i never said i shared my beliefs, you post the justice rooke judgment to which was completely irrelevant ignored protocol and made a judgment based on what he BELIEVED was true and discriminated him and profiled him.
Click to expand...

You seem to be operating on a different plane of thought as you stated explicitly:

"I never said I shared my beliefs"

Did you mean:

"I never said you shared my beliefs"

Welcome to a public message board. Your "personal beliefs" when exposed and confirmed will be questioned.
 
I'm sorry, but you can't demand beliefs be respected a priori. Value assumptions are one thing. You are making unsupportable reality assumptions, and making further unsupportable claims (the Republic of Canada for example.) I understand why you wouldn't put these forth in your opening post; you must understand that you won't get anywhere in court with them.

Exactly what "procedural" questions are you asking then?

From your first post:
I know that if this hits trial i have a damn good chance i would just destroy her, so i highly doubt she will get sole custody.

now this is what i gotta find out. is there anything i can do to improve my chances of getting what i want even higher.
Click to expand...
People are explaining that you aren't going to destroy her, you have no case. You can't show the means to care for the child or to provide a stable home. If your ex has any hard evidence of your "beliefs" you will be lucky to avoid a psychiatric assessment. That is not meant as an insult, it is mean as a factual observation.

Above all, you are not displaying clear, rational thought processes and you are not able to put together a logical argument to support what you want. You cannot achieve anything in a court of law unrepresented unless your reasoning and writing are impeccable.

If you have a simple procedural question, ask it, and if anyone knows they will answer you.
 
"what would be the grounds of getting a pat test ordered by the court. Also how much is it, again i don't have all the money in the world."

"the part where a court order for open mediation, would i have to put that in the brief for any possible orders being made on the custody/acess issue?

or would i have to go about doing that by a completely different motion?"

tayken, messand anyone else, if you would like to take this legal discussion somewhere else you can pm me and i can reply with some stuff that would show my positiion a bit more, caution, must read alot.
 
Your grounds are that she intially denied your paternity and has made conflicting statements about it.

Yes, you request that in your case conference brief.
 
Thank you. Would it be appropriate to ask that an order be made to take a DNA test during the conference in order for a procedural motion??
 
Think of the brief as a list of topics for conversation; it is not intended to be a legal argument. So yes, put it in the brief, and the judge should address it. If the judge does not, put up your hand (I am not joking), wait for the judge to acknowledge you, and say, "Your Honour, I would like to request an order for a DNA test."

I believe that this would constitute a procedural order that would not require consent of both parties; in any case, if the mother tries to deny the request, she will have to give reasons, and there can be a conversation about this. The judge will at all times lead the conversation. Do not ever interupt anyone who is speaking.
 
Thanks.

I plan to use this if she fails to show the birth cert(requested) show proof im on the birth cert and swear on an affidavit that i am the father. I noticed she didnt disagree or agree with my declaration of parentage.
 
SynGreis said:
Thanks.

I plan to use this if she fails to show the birth cert(requested) show proof im on the birth cert and swear on an affidavit that i am the father. I noticed she didnt disagree or agree with my declaration of parentage.
Click to expand...

Why do you need all that? If she is the Applicant and you are the Respondent (not sure which you are) then she has demonstrated you are the parent through application.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top