Belanger Rises From the Grave! Figuratively.

[Burnaby49]

To be totally honest Belanger probably doesn't warrant yet another discussion topic. But, as I've been whining incessantly, Canadian freemanism is essentially dead and Belanger is one of the greats, an old-time sovereign guru with a storied career of helping people destroy their lives utilizing his religion-based gibberish. Belanger plays the major role, or at least a major supporting role, in these Quatloos discussions;

Church of the Ecumenical Redemption International
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... 38#p173438

A Naked Belanger Babbles On!
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... 48&t=10167

Tragic news for Minister Belanger
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... 48&t=11570

Belanger is Back in Action!
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... 48&t=11377

Carol & Rod Volk: CERI "minister" Belanger's latest victims
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... 48&t=10123

Belanger Arrested!
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... 48&t=11152

Reverend Belanger - "Physician Heal Thyself"!
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... 48&t=10313

Thomas Peterson is calling us Dismissive Shills!
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... =48&t=9829

Gerald Lewko - Another Belanger/CERI loser
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... 48&t=10165

Re: :Edward Jay Robin: Belanger?
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... 48&t=11671

And there are probably more, I just did a quick search. For years he was out there amongst his flock doing his best to teach them how to screw the banks and governments. Then personal tragedy struck. He'd been able to give so much of himself freely because he wasn't under the obligation to support himself by working for a living. He was a recipient of AISH payments (Assured Income for the Severely Handicapped) an Alberta program to support handicapped individuals. I was never able, through watching his videos or following his progress, to determine what his handicap was and he never explained. Suffice to say the AISH payments were critical to him and then, one day in springtime of 2015, his AISH was cut off. He raged! He ranted! But as far as I'm aware he didn't get it back. The saga of his loss is given here;

http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... 48&t=10313

The loss was devastating. He disappeared into a basement suite for years, barely surfacing on a few rare occasions to toss out another video or connect through Facebook. I thought he was finished. But he's pulled himself together and left his basement cave. He's again out and about and tending to his flock in Aurora Ontario, a Toronto suburb.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ3DKTvgqHw

He said he's on a beautiful estate and he was invited there to "help them out". He's walking about outside amongst trees with a residential building well in the background, maybe it is an estate.

He's acquired a very annoying habit of clicking his tongue inside his mouth before every sentence. Click-click-click-click-click-click-click every few seconds. It's relentless and started driving me up the wall within minutes. I persevered.

He said he was making this video to explain why he makes videos at all. Given his total failure to achieve anything for his suckers over the years I've wondered that myself. He said that it's because god's gifts to us are being taken away from us by people who think they are better than us (spoiler alert - they turns out to be the Jews). It sounds like he's running another mortgage scam and the owner of the 'estate' is desperate enough to try anything. Our oppressors learned to control us through language. As children we had words put into our vocabulary that subjugated us to the authority of others and "One of those words is person". Fuck. He's off on another idiotic ramble explaining his demented definition of 'person' again. He's been beating this drum for decades and nobody's paid the slightest attention. He said, and I can attest to this, that he's put a huge effort, and many videos, into the interpretation of that one word. No shit. He's obsessed with it. Check out this Facebook posting from a few days ago where he spews out whatever biblical quotes he can find with the word 'person' in them.

Edward Jay Robin Belanger
May 8 at 6:03pm ·

What evidence is there that i am a person? Who would claim to be such a thing? Why do so called "codes" reference "person(s)" as being subject to the "law"? How is one a person? What if "law" is an abstraction and person is also an abstraction? How would one become an abstraction within the context of an abstraction? Could it be that one is a person when one claims or agrees to be a person? Could it be that when one claims or agrees to an abstraction then one is governed/ruled by abstractions? Could it be this simple?

Genesis 14 :21
And the king of Sodom said unto Abram, Give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself.

Romans 2:11 For there is no respect of persons with God.
12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

Acts 10:34
Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:

Psalms 26:4
I have not sat with vain persons, neither will I go in with dissemblers.

Job 13:10
He will surely reprove you, if ye do secretly accept persons.

James 2:9
But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.

Proverbs 28:21
To have respect of persons is not good: for for a piece of bread that man will transgress.

Psalms 82:2
How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.

Proverbs 24:23
These things also belong to the wise. It is not good to have respect of persons in judgment.

Proverbs 28:19
He that tilleth his land shall have plenty of bread: but he that followeth after vain persons shall have poverty enough.

Zephaniah 3:4
Her prophets are light and treacherous persons: her priests have polluted the sanctuary, they have done violence to the law.

Proverbs 12:11
He that tilleth his land shall be satisfied with bread: but he that followeth vain persons is void of understanding.

Ezekiel 27:13
Javan, Tubal, and Meshech, they were thy merchants: they traded the persons of men and vessels of brass in thy market.

Ephesians 6:9
And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.

Lamentations 4:16
The anger of the LORD hath divided them; he will no more regard them: they respected not the persons of the priests, they favoured not the elders.

Malachi 1:9
And now, I pray you, beseech God that he will be gracious unto us: this hath been by your means: will he regard your persons? saith the LORD of hosts.

1 Peter 1:17
And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear:

1 Timothy 1:10
For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

1 Samuel 22:22
And David said unto Abiathar, I knew it that day, when Doeg the Edomite was there, that he would surely tell Saul: I have occasioned the death of all the persons of thy father's house.

Jude 1:16
These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage.

James 2:1
My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.

2 Chronicles 19:7
Wherefore now let the fear of the LORD be upon you; take heed and do it: for there is no iniquity with the LORD our God, nor respect of persons, nor taking of gifts.

Deuteronomy 10:17
For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:

Colossians 3:25
But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons.

Jonah 4:11
And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle?

Deuteronomy 1:17
Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God's: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it.

Deuteronomy 16:19
Thou shalt not wrest judgment; thou shalt not respect persons, neither take a gift: for a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous.

But then we get a reprieve! After saying that the evil powers have used the word 'person' to subjugate the whole world he's back onto why he's making the current video. He's in Aurora to coordinate with other people who want to take action. They are tired of having their property stolen from them by banks. I'm right, it's the Volks all over, his scam how you can stop paying your mortgage and keep your property anyhow. His advice was a disaster for the Volks. You can read about them here;

http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... 48&t=10123

Banks are committing fraud by telling you that they are loaning money when it's actually an exchange. All they did is put a piece of paper in front of you which they called a mortgage but is really a promissory note. Once you signed it, it became funds, a negotiable instrument equal in value to the so-called loan the bank made you. So the money you got from the bank was your money in the first place because you created it by signing the so-called mortgage. Done deal, you fully paid with your signature, but the banks want you to pay off the amount you've already paid anyhow. Bastards. This is the most tired, worn-out, discredited of all his scams and, in his old age, he's returning to it like an old comfortable chair.

Anyhow he's in Ontario to file a lawsuit in the federal court, "ecclesiastically styled". Ecclesiastically styled means that he's not going to allow the court to think he respects 'persons' so he won't let his name to be styled in capital letters in any documents because capital letters are for obituary columns and tombstones. It's a violation of his faith to be associate with the dead. How many times, over and over, have I reviewed his videos where he goes on and on about exactly this same lunatic idiocy? He's been flogging it for decades. He's a living human being whose name is in mixed case letters. He's not a 'person' in upper case so laws are not binding on him because they only affect persons. Everything he's saying is just a repeat of his totally discredited bullshit from the early 2000's.

An acquaintance of mine who's interested in the freemen movement is of the position that none of the failed gurus, Belanger, Menard, Lindsay, Clifford, are capable of coming up with anything new. They had their own scams to sell and, when they failed, they've just tried to dress them up in new clothes and sell them again. Belanger's new suit and tie is an international treaty that he says requires the Federal Court of Canada to allow him to do whatever he wants. The treaty is our old friend the ICCPR, the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It's the wet dream of every freeman, John Spirit relies on it entirely. Every freeman court case I attended had the covenant front and centre as a main argument. Under their analysis of the covenant it is supreme law that gives them the right to demand whatever they want from the government. Wally Dove wanted $100,000,000, Belanger wants it to serve as the keystone to his 'person' scam. The only flaw in the dream is that neither the government nor the courts are on board with this demented interpretation of a meaningless piece of feel-good puffery and the argument has lost badly every time it's been brought up in court.

Then a digression to his bizarre obsession with having necrophilic sex with dead prostitutes. As I wrote in a review of a prior video;

Belanger had been doing ok to this point but then he went over the top with lunatic ramblings about copulation, prostitutes, virginity, necrophilia, commercial intercourse with dead things, and "sticking our dicks in other's holes" (all phrases he used) and then ended it all with a bad Ricky Ricardo imitation.

http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... 48&t=10167

After a little ramble through his sexual obsessions he went back on point with the comment that there are some denegrators out there who wish to smear this knowledge. Has he been reading my postings? Is he going to post on Quatloos again as Cudgel? On to another hoary old chestnut. He said explicitly that you can do whatever you want as long as you do it as part of your functions as a minister. Exactly what he had the Volks try. He made them ministers in his fake church then told them they were immune to any actions by their bank because their home was actually a protected place of worship. Religion trumps all man-made laws. Sorry, I meant their ex-home. They were foreclosed and evicted as Belanger knows since he was actually there at the time.

Back to how the government and banks are helpless against you if you claim you are practicing your faith "The international covenant is the top law in the world" and how any infringement on his claimed beliefs are a violation of the criminal code. What part of the code? Here we go again with his golden oldies. Violating the Oaths of Allegiance Act. Which, he tells us, means they have made an oath to a Christian monarch who is styled in The Royal Styles and Titles Act as the Defender of the Faith. So civil servants can't defy their allegiance to the Queen by discriminating against Christians who are exercising their faith. The covenant was ratified in 1979 and is binding upon Canada and all of it's public servants and all service providers such as banks.

So when you bring an upper and lower case complaint to Federal Court you are bringing the court into notice that the complaint is made under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The parties being served, not being aware of Belanger's overwhelming brilliance in law, will fall into his trap and respond in all upper case. Fools! By doing so they admit they are acting in their dead capacity so there has been no defense filed by the living men and women whom you've laid a claim against. Since you didn't file against a dead corporate entity you now request, and get, a default judgment because of lack of defense. Brilliant! Classic Belanger nutjobbery! He can spew this stuff out all day long.

He said that the Federal Court has been guilty of allowing the dead to defend themselves for decades but it has recently been brought to their attention that they can't do that because they are bound under the covenant. That's one fucking powerful covenant! Unfortunately it says nothing whatever about capitalization and dead people and it isn't binding law in Canada in any case. We discussed exactly this issue here;

http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... 48&t=11388

a. International Treaties are Not Binding Supra-Constitutional Authorities

[99] Mr. Pomerleau’s first fundamental error is that he claims international treaties are binding on Canada. This is wrong. International treaties, themselves, have no legal effect on governments or persons in Canada. A treaty is an agreement between states that is political in nature: A.G. for Ontario v Scott, 1955 CanLII 16 (SCC), [1956] SCR 137 at 142, 1 DLR (2d) 433. The only way in which an international treaty has any force and effect inside this country is by government order or if the treaty’s provisions are enacted as Canadian legislation: Capital Cities Communications Inc. v Canadian Radio-Television Commission, 1977 CanLII 12 (SCC), [1978] 2 SCR 141 at 188, 81 DLR (3d) 609. Canadian governments may ignore international treaty and law, and even legislate in conflict and default on their international obligations, provided that is done in an explicit manner: R v Hape, 2007 SCC 26 (CanLII) at paras 53-54, [2007] 2 SCR 292.

d. Conclusion

[126] This shows how international treaties simply do not work the way Mr. Pomerleau says they do. Treaties are not ‘superior law’. Instead, a treaty is a political statement, and has no direct relevance or binding effect on Canadians and Canadian governments, unless the government takes the positive step of creating a domestic law that matches an international treaty. Even then the international treaties do not control the operation of that domestic law. Treaties are, at most, an interpretive tool.

So Belanger can weave all the grand schemes he wants using ICCPR as a basis but the courts will just ignore it. If he files lawsuits in Federal Court (which I very much doubt) and he gets back defenses with all capital names, he's going to be traumatized when the court treats them as valid defenses. He's right about one thing though. His lawsuits will be disposed through default judgment but, unfortunately, they will be default judgments against him.

Then on to urgent personal matters;

So, this time that I'm spending here in Aurora, right now, I'm looking for another place to stay because the place I'm staying is overcrowded, I cannot stay here any longer, I need some room.

Can't be much of an estate if they can't give him even a corner to call his own. As a result he's offering free advice and guidance in the teaching that he provides in exchange for room and board.

He's said he's (to paraphrase) overwhelmed that nobody believes his bullshit and he's desperate (he used 'desperate') to get people on board who believe in him. He doesn't understand why he's the lone voice in the wilderness spewing out all this gibberish. His knowledge base must not be lost or the Jews win. Where the hell did the Jews come from? He explained that the Jews, while in Babylonian captivity, snuck the Torah into Hammurabi's code which has carried forward to present and Its being used to subjugate all the non-Jewish people in the world. We're all purchased property owned by Jews. It says so in the bible! It's in the Canadian Control and Determination Act too! Damn, those Jews are thorough! It's in regulation schedule 2. So here's the act he's babbling about. Feel free to find a schedule 2 to the regulations. I couldn't. Maybe the Jews have hidden it;

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-20/

Then he was off about how Canada went off the gold standard in 1933 and there is no gold backing our currency any more. Is this supposed to be a revelation? So what gives value to our money? Our secret birth bonds which the government steals from us without telling us. His old rant about how he's owed an annuity (a whole life policy) at 12.3% since he was born and the government won't pay him out. Given that he looks about a hundred years old compound interest must be really boosting that sucker up for him. And he can prove it! A "lady in Australia" has managed to take control of her son's estate and one day Belanger will share the details with us but, sadly, not right now. Crap. I'm getting on too and I could use that sweet, sweet annuity that's been sitting there for almost seventy years. Maybe Belanger is using that knowledge himself right now to collect his annuity. Then he won't have to beg for accommodation over the internet.

Speaking of begging, back to it. He won't impose for long, less than 30 days. He was invited to the estate as a guest but not provided accommodation up to his standards. Then, to close, he took us for a walk around the property. He's getting quite proprietary, already talking about how "we" lost three or four trees on the property a week ago. So he's been there at least a week. The people there "heard the Word" and called him and, according to him, fell for his bullshit hook, line and sinker. But he's not saying what the specific scam he's running is. I'm guessing a mortgage his hosts can't pay.

You get a background shot of the house at 25:20. Big place. Must be hosting an army regiment if there's no room for the paraclete. He ended with a little discussion about how he's soldiered on sacrificing for us all for decades without asking for money but if anyone wants to give him some he won't say no. So start digging into your wallets gang!

[Siegfried Shrink]

I wonder what he'd make of the Offences against the Person Act 1861

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vic ... 0/contents

I wonder if he thinks the bible was written in modern English, or all translators used the same words in the same way. Probably not, to consider if your arguments are reasonable requires a willingness to admit you might be wrong.

Would he get an old age pension, despite probably being decades delinquent on contributions?

It must be a terrible isolation being the only person in the world to know the Truth.

[Burnaby49]

He qualifies for at least the Old Age Security pension and the Guaranteed Income Supplement. Neither are based on past earnings.

1. Overview

The Old Age Security program is the Government of Canada's largest pension program. It is funded out of the general revenues of the Government of Canada, which means that you do not pay into it directly.

The Old Age Security(OAS) pension is a monthly payment available to seniors aged 65 and older who meet the Canadian legal status and residence requirements. You may need to apply to receive it.

In addition to the OAS pension, there are three types of OAS benefits:

Guaranteed Income Supplement If you live in Canada and you have a low income, this monthly non-taxable benefit can be added to your OAS pension.

https://www.canada.ca/en/services/benef ... urity.html

The OAS, while you have to apply for it, is an automatic right. However it is based on an income test and can be reduced or disallowed if you exceed income limits. His income is too low to make this an issue, he'd have to exceed about $70,000 a year of other income before it started getting reduced. He'll qualify for the GIS because his income is probably just the OAS so he doesn't exceed the "low income" limits set for GIS qualification. The GIS was designed for people who receive only OAS because they haven't earned CPP rights (below) or have any income from other sources. I assume his AISH was unaffected by these two pensions.

Both of these pensions come out of general revenue and are not based on contribution taken from people during their working years. The third major government pension is the Canada Pension Plan, a government mandated and controlled national plan based on earnings which is contribution based. All Canadian employees have mandatory CPP contributions deducted at source while working and you can claim the pension (with a discount) at age 60. You can get an undiscounted CPP pension at age 65. The amount of your pension is based on the amount of your past contributions. Belanger may qualify for some CPP pension since I believe he was gainfully employed for a while way, way back. But it won't be much.

Overall, even if Belanger hasn't worked a day in his life, he'll have enough for a modest, actually a very modest, lifestyle as long as he doesn't live in a high cost city like Vancouver or Toronto. However it is above abject poverty. His AISH was probably the extra that allowed him something above reasonable existence.

Canadian pensions can get complicated. Take me as an example. I get a superannuation pension. This is a pension for federal government employees and is based on mandatory contributions. It is set by federal legislation, the Public Service Superannuation Act.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-36/

In addition I get CPP. I claimed it at age 60 with a discount because, under the very generous rules at the time, only an idiot would wait to age 65 for the full pension. Neither CPP or superannuation is affected by other income, they are absolute lifetime entitlements. When I retired I also received OAS which, for a while, meant I was getting three different pensions. I lost OAS this year because of a blip in my 2017 income level. However that was a very unusual year and, in the future, I anticipate my income dropping back down to prior levels where I'll qualify for it again. I'll never qualify for GIS because my superannuation income alone exceeds the GIS means-test cutoff.

While I was working my CPP and superannuation deductions skimmed off about 10% of my gross wages before I got my paycheque. I didn't mind for two reasons, I couldn't do anything about it and it meant I got a decent pension decades down the road. However decades down the road come at you a hell of a lot faster than you think and I'm reaping that benefit now.

[dannyno]

From the Edmonton Journal, 18 September 2001:

Confusion reigns before pot fine: Vocal supporter of marijuana candidate led away from court
by Hanneke Brooymans

A federal Marijuana Party candidate was convicted for producing marijuana and fined $3,000 Monday during a somewhat raucous court appearance.

The judge presiding over the case had security guards evict a man from the courtroom after he loudly accused the judge of treason.

The man, a self-proclaimed Christian minister, was speaking on behalf of Ken Kirk, a well-known marijuana activist who wore a grey pin-stripe suit and had his long grey hair pulled back in a ponytail. Kirk, 39, wanted Edward Belanger, the minister, to replace his lawyer.

But Belanger began by demanding the judge proclaim his allegiance to God. When the judge's answer somehow failed to please the man, he accused the judge of treason.

Unable to reason with the man, Court of Queen's Bench Justice Scott Brooker calmly asked security guards to remove him from the courtroom. Belanger left, still shouting abuse at the judge and accusing the guards of assault.

Kirk, who is a member of the Church of Reformed Druids and the Church of the Universe, was distressed at the removal of the minister. He said if the judge didn't properly proclaim his religious allegiance he couldn't accept his jurisdiction over him. "You are committing treason and I would ask the officers to arrest you," said Kirk from the prisoner's box.

But Brooker sternly reprimanded Kirk.

After Kirk calmed down, he agreed to keep his lawyer and plead guilty to producing marijuana.

But afterward he said the judge forced him, under threat of imprisonment, to plead guilty. He said he refuses to pay his fine.

Kirk said he doesn't believe his sentence reflects badly on him. The conviction was based on a 1998 arrest when he and his former girlfriend were found with 12 marijuana plants and about 50 grams of the narcotic.

The musician and audio-visual technician said he smokes marijuana to treat his epilepsy. He intended to enter the municipal election as a mayoral candidate and run with a pro-hemp, pro-environment platform. But he missed Monday's noon nomination deadline by a few minutes.

"The more I get busted, the more legitimate I am to my supporters," he said. "Every time they do something like this they create another activist."

His former girlfriend, Amy Von Stackelberg, 22, was fined $2,000 for possession of marijuana. The two broke off their association long ago, said Brian McGlashan, her defence lawyer.

"She's very embarrassed about her relationship with him."

[Siegfried Shrink]

If the former GF is 22 she must have been 2 at the time of the original crime. This is below the age of criminal responsibility so I cannot see why she was fined.
It could be the journo simply copied and pasted the name and age, but who'd believe that?

Church of Reformed Druids

It's always a laugh what they call themselves. Why reform the Druids, they were batty enough in the original. Which was a Victorian invention. Though possibly not weedy enough.

Good catch on the Belanger aspect.

Cries of Treason are uniquely associated with FITL or Sovcit nutters nowadays.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Church of Reformed Druids

It's always a laugh what they call themselves. Why reform the Druids, they were batty enough in the original. Which was a Victorian invention.

Reformed Druid Rabbis aren't as strict in their interpretations as Orthodox Druid Rabbis?

[HardyW]

If the former GF is 22 she must have been 2 at the time of the original crime. This is below the age of criminal responsibility so I cannot see why she was fined.
It could be the journo simply copied and pasted the name and age, but who'd believe that?

No the offence was in 1998 and the news article is from 2001, so she'd be 19 or so. I know Burnaby tells us Canadian justice is slow but not that slow.

[bmxninja357]

Kirk was akways a piece of shit. He was abusive to amy all the time. I knew him. And if you look close my name appears as a founder of the church of the reformed druids as well as a couple other religions. Lol. Not bad for an atheist.

Peace
Ninj

[BoomerSooner17]

Church of Reformed Druids

It's always a laugh what they call themselves. Why reform the Druids, they were batty enough in the original. Which was a Victorian invention.

Reformed Druid Rabbis aren't as strict in their interpretations as Orthodox Druid Rabbis?

There was a joke on the M*A*S*H TV show to the effect that reformed Druids are allowed to worship bushes, not just trees.

[notorial dissent]

Or the Zen Reformed Druids who worship the oak tree that isn't there.

[Burnaby49]

In this case the whole thing was a front to try and get around marijuana laws. They figured if they claimed they were druids and smoking marijauna was part of their religious rites they might be able to get a charter exemption for what was otherwise an illegal act. When it didn't work the druid movement collapsed and Belanger, a member of the group, moved on to found his own fake Christian church.

[notorial dissent]

In this case the whole thing was a front to try and get around marijuana laws. They figured if they claimed they were druids and smoking marijauna was part of their religious rites they might be able to get a charter exemption for what was otherwise an illegal act. When it didn't work the druid movement collapsed and Belanger, a member of the group, moved on to found his own fake Christian church.

Something something about not learning from history or something to that effect, but then considering who we're talking about maybe not so much.

[Burnaby49]

He's crapped out another video;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK7mQZPWFhE

More of the usual whining and complaining. Governments don't respect that he's actually a minister and won't recognize him as such even though the bible orders them to do so. Some bible verse saying that god made him a minister so it's all settled. Since they fail to recognize his status they won't kiss his ass refuse to accommodate his demands under the UN covenant on civil and political rights. That would be ICCPR which I've discussed many, many times in the past. You can read about it here;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internati ... cal_Rights

It's been having a resurgence among Canadian freemen notwithstanding that it's totally toothless, has been argued and refuted in court numerous times, and has no legal weight in Canada. But, according to Belanger, and others, it means they can demand whatever the hell they want from the government and the government is required by the treaty to give it. Belanger could sue the government in court to force them to meet his demands under ICCPR rather than endless impotent whining on YouTube but he knows what the result will be.

But he finally has a plan! It's right there in the title to his video;

"Success by uniting and bearing witness of ministry.."

He wants all of his followers to whine too! Brilliant! One crying baby is just an annoyance. A hundred crying babies squalling away can be overwhelming. Assuming, a big assumption, that he can get a hundred squalling whiners to join him. His followers, if he has any, seem content to sit back and let him do the work. Perhaps they want to see some results first and Belanger, dead broke, living in someone's basement, complaining that his 'followers' won't even cough up pocket change to support his crusade, has shown zero results after over twenty years of striving. Well some results, he got the Volks evicted from their home and he's helped others make bad debt situations much, much worse. But this time it's going to be different!

"So, what I'm asking, for those who wish to participate in this international experiment, late coming and overdue, is blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, once we find out that we're in bed with this old dead prostitute w have to get out of her blah, blah, blah, blah, blah"

He invokes Christ a lot so I will too. FOCUS FOR CHRIST'S SAKE. He can't keep a line of discussion going for more than a minute before he's off on a tangent about something else entirely. He's supposed to be explaining to his followers how they can beat the system but instead he's obsessively going back to his sick, sick fetish about sex with dead whores. He probably can't order a coffee in a restaurant without telling the waitress all about his necrophilia lusting. THEN HE'S BACK TO OLD DEAD PROSTITUTES AGAIN! First it was governments. Now "commercial courts" are also dead prostitutes. Everything in Belanger's world is a dead prostitute. And then he was on about 'fornicating' with her to get "living virginity". His theology is way too deep for me.

He's wandering around the estate while he's talking. But he still won't say why he's there. Pleasant sunny day, everything's blooming, his got a doobie he's sucking away on, life is good. But he says it's only momentary, fleeting, as is life. Well if life is so fucking fleeting get to the point! Anyhow back to rambling on how the government can't obstruct his listeners from their ministry (even though they seem to be doing a damn good job to date). He seems to be getting more or less back on track. He tells them to communicate with government officials in their private capacity. No postal codes, no upper case names, no "mister". If you do that and they don't grovel to your every demand you can sue them for not providing the support they are duty bound to provide through ICCPR. He's in a forced slave camp. Given the estate he's currently wandering around you can sign me up for that one.

Then I think he's back on topic although it's hard to tell given his total inability to stay on track and to explain things simply. He seems to want his followers to petition government officials on his behalf, not theirs. To order them to leave his alone and remove his name from all government records. He can't mean that literally because then he'd stop getting welfare and he's obsessive about his welfare payments. Anyhow they have to order the government to stop obstructing his ministry and his belief in the King James Bible. At this point he's almost shouting at them to get off their fat asses and complain on his behalf. Some stupidity about how a Supreme Court of Canada case says that nobody can interfere with your religious beliefs no matter what they are and laws don't affect you if they conflict with your beliefs.

Then he's back to thrashing around in the thickets with whatever point he may be trying to make receding over the horizon. Volleys of bible verses beyond counting. Then a blatant outright lie "I think I've made that pretty clear". He apparently has some legal problems back home because he want all of us to help him by berating the City of Edmonton police, the Edmonton mayor, and the Justice Minister for Alberta. Then blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. He said "my effort here" is to get them to bear witness to the fact that he is a minister and he is feeling intimidated, obstructed and nuisanced by their reluctance to obey ICCPR. What he's saying is what he's argued for years, that he can pull whatever claimed religious beliefs he wants out of his ass and government employees must grovel before him and accept them. They are required to by the Criminal Code of Canada and ICCPR. But, even though he's beaten on this drum for years, government employees have ignored him completely like he's an irrelevant nobody. That might be what sends him into his hissy-fit rants, being totally ignored, not being shown even the minimal respect of deserving at least a rebuttal.

Then, as always, the Jews. The reason nobody in government obeys him is because the proof that his religious interpretations are correct and his beliefs are supreme law is in the King James bible. But Jews don't read King James, they read and obey the Talmud. He warns DON'T READ THE TALMUD. The Jews have a death sentence on any non-Jew reading it. But "the cat's out of the bag now" and it's too late to kill and enslave everyone who reads it.

Then, at the end, his real point. He wants his birth annuity and he wants it now. When he and his followers finally get them they will set up their own government, their own water, education and health systems, and they can do it all just fine from their birth bonds which are their own property anyhow. They are required to provide him with an independent adequate lifestyle according to ICCPR and he wants it.

And he's got proof of his birth bond! In the past he's rambled on about his birth bond earning 12.3% but never explained where that came from. But this time he said that it's;

"right there in schedule 2 of the Canadian Ownership and Control Determination Act 1984 regulations."

"For anyone who goes and takes the time to look that up you'll find that those regulations give a value of life upon you of eight million dollars collecting annuities of 12.3% per annum."

"And don't let anybody tell you that it's a petroleum and oil producers act or gas producers act because we produce gas, sit next to somebody long enough and you'll find out."

Too much information, I'm not interested in your digestive problems Paraclete. He's pulled some schedule out of a federal legislative Act regulating the ownership of the oil and gas industry and, because he farts a lot, says that it is applicable to him too. That's some legal wizardry! He also produces oil! Apparently because he has a greasy face and he oozes oil through his sweat glands. "So we are physically oil and gas producers that do fit into the category of beneficially owned property". So, in his mythology the fact that he farts a lot means that he's been enslaved by an act of parliament regulating a natural resource industry. Belanger said that he talked to the individual who wrote the Canadian Ownership and Control Determination Act. This person quit Justice Canada and quit being a lawyer because it was the most violent despicable legislation he'd ever worked on. It wasn't about the petroleum industry at all, it was really about slavery! In two minutes in this video Belanger has taken crazy to an entirely new level! But I must be wrong about that because Belanger said that "this isn't a theory, this is real, this is big time." So it must be all true! But God has now washed away all the laws that oppress us. Like the law that says you can't cross your legs when you sit at the table. I wasn't aware of a leg-crossing law but I'll defer to Belanger's superior knowledge of these things. I'd never considered myself to be an integral component of the oil and gas industry either until Belanger explained it. He's obviously way ahead of me in legal knowledge.

He said he's leaving us to peace and tranquility with the request to bear witness to his ministry. He gave his website, Youtube, Gmail and Skype addresses but wouldn't give his phone number because "there are people who want that phone number". He's apparently so senile he's already forgotten he gave it in his last video a week ago. No word on how his search for alternative accomodation is going.

As he suggested I took the time to look up the regulation he uses to justify his whole birth bond story. Here it is;

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regu ... .html#h-44

And it's all there in table II just like he said!

TABLE II Present value of life annuities (present value of life interest) of $1.00 per annum payable annually in arrears for life. Interest rate is at 12.3% per annum, compounded annually.

So there's the 12.3%! It says right in the schedule that when you are born your birth bond is worth $7,906,649. Granted it just gives the number 7.906649 which is a present value multiple for something or another in the act but we people in the know are aware of what it really means. But one thing bothers me about this masterful expose of the theft of our birth bonds. Standing alone, the present value table in schedule two isn't legislation, it's just a bunch of numbers. Since this is just a schedule to the Act it must reference to something specific within the Act itself. But Belanger has left out that last link in his chain of evidence proving our birth bonds exist. He didn't tell us the section of the Act that schedule 2 applies to. If the birth bonds exist this unmentioned section must be where they are legislated. A bit strange, given how he was spewing out vast volumes of biblical and statutory citations and references all through his video, that he neglected to tell us the last critical statutory section that ties it all together. Perhaps he's saving it to induce us to watch the next video.

[Siegfried Shrink]

The actual video is a lot more boring than reading the well crafted summary.

It's not the craziest looking of his works I have seen, but I think it is the most boring.

[ArthurWankspittle]

If he produces oil and gas can you sell him to the Chinese?

[BoomerSooner17]

I propose a new nickname for our oil-spewing friend: Spindleflop. Now we just have to cap him lest we let all of his secretions escape!

[Burnaby49]

I propose a new nickname for our oil-spewing friend: Spindleflop. Now we just have to cap him lest we let all of his secretions escape!

Now that Belanger's finally given some background to his birth bond theory I'm working on a technical posting about his theory connecting it to the legislation he cites. Been at it on and off (mostly off) much of the day. I'll be covering his gaseous emmissions argument in some detail and I'll be giving him helpful hints how to demonstrate he's a gas producer at court when he files suit at the Federal Court of Canada.

[notorial dissent]

Are You sure there isn't a pub somewhere that needs your attention? It would have to be more fun and much more entertaining than the good old paracite.

[Burnaby49]

Are You sure there isn't a pub somewhere that needs your attention? It would have to be more fun and much more entertaining than the good old paracite.

The reason I was working on the posting "on and off" was that I spent the 'off' portion at the Railway Club in downtown Vancouver. Lunch and beers with my fellow retired tax oppressors. As I'm writing the posting I'm fortifying myself with a Central City raspberry wheat ale.

[Burnaby49]

The actual video is a lot more boring than reading the well crafted summary.

It's not the craziest looking of his works I have seen, but I think it is the most boring.

Tough. You get no sympathy from me. Did I recommend that you watch the video? DID I? They are all boring. However this, in my opinion, is his most informative video yet because of the legal theory espoused. He's yammered on for years how he has an $8,000,000 birth bond that is accruing interest at 12.3%. His basic theory is that all Canadians are enslaved by the Federal government at birth and a bond is created based (I assume) on their estimated lifetime earnings. A wildly optimistic assumption in Belanger's case. The government invests the $8Mil at 12.3% and the elite steal the proceeds. The government could finance itself on the bond income alone but taxes us anyhow. However using Belanger's magic, we can force the government to (this is unclear) either pay us the 12.3% annual interest or cash out our bonds. Sometimes he say one alternative, sometimes the other. In this video it's a cash out to fund his King James Bible based Kingdom of God alternate community. This is a theory which he promotes but which has obviously failed to personally successfully apply.

This is one of his key points in trying to attract suckers, the $8,000,000 birth bond we can access if we just follow his wisdom and become dues-paying ministers of his church. But he's never explained the mechanics of this claim, where his numbers come from. I thought the interest rate and bond principal were just random numbers pulled out of his ass but, to my surprise, he's got them through a very convoluted interpretation of actual federal legislation, the Canadian Ownership and Control Determination Act. ("the COCD"). An Act so obscure that even Wikipedia doesn't have an article about it and I'd never heard of it.

Here is the COCD itself;

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts ... ml#docCont

And here are the regulation to it;

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regu ... .html#h-32

First his theory as I understand it, then my understanding of the COCD. His theory is that the COCD regulates the oil and gas industry and turns oil and gas assets into properties beneficially owned by the Canadian government. Since he, and all the rest of us revolting humans, fart constantly we are actually gas producing assets and therefore fall under the ambit of the COCD. This, apparently, is actually the real intent of the COCD because it makes us, through the government's beneficial ownership, slaves. Somehow, through the powers of the COCD, this allows the government to create an $8,000,000 birth bond compounding at 12.3% annually. The birth bond amount and the interest rate are claimed to be set in Schedule II of the COCD. He claims that he can teach us how to force the government to relinquish or birth bonds through the employment of various Criminal Code provisions. I'm not going to review his video again to pull them out and analyze them. While he cites the COCD and the Criminal Code he doesn't actually give a reference to anything that relates to the creation of bonds, birth bonds or otherwise.

This is a unique, and totally Canadian reconstruction of the American Strawman theory and the birth bond belief. Since I've not heard of it elsewhere I have to assume it is entirely Belanger's creation. It's very rare that one of the deadbeats that I follow comes up with something entirely new, they are parasites in their belief systems along with their lifestyles, but Belanger seems to have done just that.

Now, on to the COCD. It isn't a stand-alone piece of legislation. It's an ancillary act to the Investment Canada Act.

The Investment Canada Act (ICA)[1] is a Canadian Federal law governing large foreign direct investment in Canada. The ICA was one of the first acts of Brian Mulroney's newly elected Progressive Conservative government, receiving royal assent on 20 June 1985. It has been amended at various times, including recently the Economic Action Plan 2013 Act.[1][2] Pertinent regulations include the Investment Canada Regulations, SOR/85-611.[3] The Act empowers the government to forbid foreign investments of "significant" size if they do not present a "net benefit to Canada." As of 2014, Canadian policy is to consider over $354 million "significant."[4] The determination of what substantially constitutes the locus of control of a corporation is governed by the Canadian Ownership and Control Determination Act.[5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investment_Canada_Act

So, outside of Belanger's lunatic ramblings, the vague purpose of the Canadian Investment Act is to empower "the government to forbid foreign investments of "significant" size if they do not present a "net benefit to Canada"." The COCD and regulations is a technical reference for the Canadian Investment Act which determines how to calculate foreign control of corporations which in turn control investments in Canada.

control status means, with respect to a person, whether or not the person is Canadian controlled as (determined under this Act and the regulations;état de contrôle)

person means an individual, a corporation, a partnership, a trust, a government, an agency of government, a segregated fund within the meaning of the regulations and an organization that is prescribed as being a person or that falls into a (class of organizations prescribed as being persons;personne)

prescribed means prescribed by the regulations, or with respect to the form and manner in which any application under this Act shall be filed or the information and documentation to be contained in or to accompany that application, means prescribed by order of the Minister.

As you can see from the dreary definitions above it's concerned about 'persons' controlling things. While the COCD notes oil and gas investments it seems to be primarily concerned with insurance companies and trusts. This is what the regulations covers in oil and gas;

Canadian oil or gas investment means

(a) a right, licence or privilege to

(i) explore for,
(ii) drill for,
(iii) take, or
(iv) store

underground petroleum, natural gas or other related hydrocarbons in Canada,

(b) an oil or gas well situated in Canada,

(c) a rental or royalty computed by reference to the amount or value of production from an oil or gas well situated in Canada,

(d) a right to or interest in any property described in paragraphs (a) to (c) including a right to receive the proceeds of disposition of that property, or

(e) a direct equity percentage that is not less than one-half of one per cent in any entity or that represents an investment with a current market value of $1,000,000 or more, if the entity is a principal-business entity, is Canadian controlled and has a Canadian ownership rate of not less than 50%; (investissement dans le pétrole et le gaz canadiens)

principal-business entity means an entity the principal business of which is

(a) producing, refining or marketing petroleum, petroleum products or natural gas, or exploring or drilling for petroleum or natural gas or other related hydrocarbons, or

(b) operating a pipeline for the transmission of oil or natural gas; (entité exploitant une entreprise principale)

See anything about Belanger's noxious gaseous emissions in there? Well, apart from that bit about producing natural gas. I'll concede that his claim of expertise in that area is probably valid. But the COCD regulations go nuts over insurance companies;

Fraternal benefit society has the same meaning as in subsection 2(1) of the Canadian and British Insurance Companies Act; (société de bénéfices mutuels)

gross actuarial reserves has the same meaning as in subsection 82.1(1) of the Canadian and British Insurance Companies Act; (réserves actuarielles brutes)

life insurance company means a company registered, licensed or otherwise authorized to carry on the business of life insurance under the laws of Canada or a province and includes a fraternal benefit society; (compagnie d’assurance-vie)

life insurance policy means any written contract of life insurance, other than a policy in respect of which a segregated fund is maintained, whether contained in one or more documents, an annuity contract and, in the case of insurance in a fraternal benefit society, includes any contract whether or not evidenced in writing and any certificate of membership relating in any way to life insurance; (police d’assurance-vie)

life policy in Canada means a life insurance policy issued or effected by a life insurance company on the life of a person who according to the records of the insurer had an address in Canada at the time the policy was issued or effected; (police d’assurance-vie au Canada)

mutual company means a life insurance company without share capital or a property and casualty insurance company without share capital; (société mutuelle)

non-participating policy means a life insurance policy other than a participating policy; (police d’assurance-vie sans participation)

participating policy means a life insurance policy under which the policyholder is entitled to share, other than by way of an experience rating refund, in the profits of the insurer, other than profits in respect of property in a segregated fund; (police d’assurance-vie avec participation)

participating policyholder in Canada means a policyholder in Canada of a participating policy; (titulaire de police d’assurance-vie avec participation au Canada)

policyholder in Canada means a person shown on the records of an insurer as having an address in Canada and as being the owner of a life policy in Canada or a property and casualty policy in Canada; (assuré au Canada)

property and casualty insurance company means a company, other than a life insurance company, that is registered, licensed or otherwise authorized to carry on the business of property and casualty insurance under the laws of Canada or a province and includes a fraternal benefit society; (compagnie d’assurance contre les accidents et les dommages à la propriété)

property and casualty insurance policy means any written contract of insurance, other than life insurance or a policy in respect of which a segregated fund is maintained, whether contained in one or more documents and, in the case of insurance in a fraternal benefit society, includes any contract whether or not evidenced in writing and any certificate of membership relating in any way to insurance other than life insurance; (police d’assurance contre les accidents et les dommages à la propriété)

property and casualty policy in Canada means a property and casualty insurance policy issued or effected by a property and casualty insurance company where the persons or property at risk covered by the policy were ordinarily resident or located, as the case may be, within Canada at the time the policy was issued or effected; (police d’assurance contre les accidents et les dommages à la propriété au Canada)

As for the notorious schedule II to the COCD regulations, you can see that here;

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regu ... ml#docCont

First a word about regulations to Acts. They are utilized very extensively in Canadian legislation because statutory acts often cover items that the government wants to change frequently for whatever reason. For example the Income Tax Act allows tax deductible depreciation based on the cost of capital assets used in a business. The right to claim depreciation is in the Act itself but the amount that you can claim as a percentage of the asset's cost is as allowed by schedule in the regulations to the Act. This is because statutory acts can only be changed by a vote in parliament, a very cumbersome business, however regulations can be changed overnight on the whims of government. The government can change depreciation deduction rates just by amending the regulations. If it wants to boost an industry by allowing it higher depreciation rates it just needs to change a few lines of the regulations and it's effective immediately. So the nitty-gritty details for calculating things like depreciation, or how to determine the degree of foreign ownership, is relegated to regulations rather than being included in a legislated Act. As the COCD itself says;

20 The Governor in Council may make regulations

(a) defining formal equity with respect to persons other than corporations, partnerships or trusts;

(b) respecting the interests or rights that constitute informal equity;

(c) prescribing the classes or types of interests or rights to acquire formal equity and prescribing the circumstances in which and the persons by whom those interests or rights shall be deemed to have been exercised or acquired;

(d) determining classes of formal equity and prescribing the types of shares, interests or rights that shall be excluded from formal equity;

(e) respecting the calculation or determination of the Canadian ownership rate of any person or class of persons, the authorization of the Minister to make any calculation or determination necessary for those purposes and the manner in which any such calculation or determination shall be made;

(f) prescribing the circumstances in which a person or class of persons shall be deemed not to be Canadian controlled;

(g) respecting the determination of the control status of a person other than a corporation;

(h) respecting the meaning of the words owned, owner and ownership for the purposes of this Act and the regulations;

(i) prescribing any other matter or thing that is by this Act to be prescribed; and

(j) respecting such other matters or things as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act.

In other words the whole COCD is contained in the regulations. It's apparent from reading the Act itself which is only a few pages long while the regulations are extensive.

And that's what's in Schedule II. It's comprised of four tables;

TABLE I - Life Tables, Canada, 1970-72 Published by Statistics Canada in connection with the 1971 Census of Canada.

TABLE II - Present value of life annuities (present value of life interest) of $1.00 per annum payable annually in arrears for life. Interest rate is at 12.3% per annum, compounded annually.

TABLE III - Present value of annuity certain (annuity for term certain) of $1.00 per annum payable annually in arrears. Interest rate is at 12.3% per annum, compounded annually.

TABLE IV - Present value of $1.00 due at the end of the number of years indicated (present value of deferred gifts). Interest rate is at 12.3% per annum, compounded annually.

It's obviously been included for some technical issues elsewhere in the regulations in respect to the life insurance sections. But I have to at least give Belanger credit for finding this very obscure piece of legislation and having enough ingenuity to weave it into a compelling story of riches attainable through the right magical incantation. There's his 12.3% right in the schedule! And I assume his $8,000,000 birth bond amount was derived from this;

MALES
Age Value of Life Annuity
0 7.906649
1 8.060559

As Belanger correctly notes beneficial ownership of property is included in the Regulations but it isn't in respect to the government taking beneficial ownership of anything. It's related to the calculation of foreign ownership percentages. When calculating these amounts the government considers indirect ownership through trusts along with direct ownership. In those cases the beneficial owners of the trust count as part of the foreign ownership total even if the trust itself is Canadian.

Obviously that nonsense about Belanger personally speaking to the writer of the COCD and hearing his heart-rending story about how he left the legal profession in shame as a result of writing it is nothing but straight Belanger bullshit. An outright lie like much of what he spews out in his videos. But, but . . . . . . there may be a grain of truth in it. The authors (no legislation is written by one person) should have reclused themselves in shame for having written possibly the most boring legislation in Canada's history.

The only reliable part of Belanger's whole story is his confession that he's beset by excessive flatulence. I see no reason to doubt that. But, ever resourceful, he's turned this apparent liability into an asset by using it as the keystone for an entire theory about why he's owed $8,000,000!

A few suggestions for you Minister Belanger. First; take your claim against the federal government for your $8,000,000 to the Federal Court of Canada. They handle federal legislation issues. Is this is the lawsuit that you claimed in your video you were going to file at Federal court? I have one suggestion regarding the presentation of evidence. Treat yourself to a big Boston Baked Bean dinner the night before your hearing, the bigger the better, stuff yourself. Then, at your hearing, demonstrate to the court that you are indeed a viable gas producing asset that falls within the ambit of the COCD. Sovereigns brag endlessly how they have driven judges out of their own courtrooms but only you have found an effective way to guarantee doing this. Clearing the court will have an entirely new meaning! Notwithstanding the obvious personal risk of being in proximity to a volatile highly pressurized gasbag I want to attend that hearing! Blast away Paraclete Belanger!

And one more suggestion if I may. Your statutory based interpretations are a complete answer for your arguments about your birth bonds. They are clearly overwhelming and irrefutable. So rely on them alone and don't indulge in your usual endless rambles about bible-based laws. As you said in the video all Canadian courts are dead whores presided over by Jews. Give any New Testament quotes at all and you'll alert the Jewish judge about whom he's really dealing with, not the demented old loon that you portray so superbly in your videos but a King James Minister armoured by Christian scripture. If that happens your case is doomed.