Church of the Ecumenical Redemption International

[AndyK]

Until such time when Minister Catherine does adequate research into the "Protocols" and admits she has become convinced that they are a blatant anti-semitic Tsarist fraud, she remains at the bottom of the list of people worthy of either consideration or a response.

Her various theories, premises, and theocracies lie there with her.

[wserra]

Can you explain the relationship of marijuana use to the beliefs of the group as well?

Sure. They only understand what Belanger is saying when they're high. And the higher they are, the better they understand.

[notorial dissent]

Certainly cuts down on the divergent opinions if nothing else.

[minister Catherine]

Can you explain the relationship of marijuana use to the beliefs of the group as well?

Sure. They only understand what Belanger is saying when they're high. And the higher they are, the better they understand.

Again, all based on assumption!

[obadiah]

Can you explain the relationship of marijuana use to the beliefs of the group as well?

Sure. They only understand what Belanger is saying when they're high. And the higher they are, the better they understand.

Again, all based on assumption!

minister Catherine:
Tell us where the assumptions are wrong;
i.e. Tell us the truth about the relationship of marijuana use to the beliefs of the group.

[LordEd]

It is all based on assumptions.

Yes, your writing seems to be full of them.

The first agreement I got was with The Minister of Justice on July 29, 2010. I was very new to this at the time and I did not do a very good job on it. I got the same agreement with the Minister of Transportation, the Mayor, the City Solicitor, the Premier, 3 police Chief's and a few others.

I did not get any answer back from any of them. It says right in my agreement that if they do not answer me then they agree by tacit consent which means they agree by silence. Yes they do have to answer me if I am wrong as they are public servants.

You assumed they agreed, and you assume they have to answer.

I believe our government is a tyranny government and they only listen to corporations.
God said "do not add to my law, do not take away from my law, this I command you". That is exactly what they did to make money.

I have to admit though that the R.C.M.P. officer scared me so I moved to Nova Scotia where my family is. While I was there I thought to myself "I cannot let these people scare me, I have the truth on my side" and I started this so I have to finish this so I came back to Edmonton"

You assume it is truth based on your other assumptions.

My court date was October 23rd 2012 and I did not show up because they are bias, they have a false oath and I wouldn't have a chance against the very system that I am fighting. Right there I would be in the belly of the beast.

You assume they are biased.

It's been over 3 years since I got my first agreement.

Since you assumed you had agreement

The media is defaming me because of it.]/quote]So you assume

Why couldn't they just leave it alone. They are trying to make me look like a terrorist by putting me right beside the Freeman on the land movement in the paper, also printing lie after lie. How can you get a story straight when you are assuming and not communicating with the one you are writing about?

I assume you'll figure it out eventually.

Every time I stepped in that courthouse there would be cops following me everywhere and I'm thinking all this over traffic tickets, I must have something here. The whole time I was fighting these tickets in court they gave me the run around, sending me to wrong courtrooms, giving me wrong phone numbers, names etc. What do they have to hide? Could I be right? Do they have a big scam going on. Yes they do, they are racketeering and money laundering, they have a false oath and they are buying, selling and trading us on the stock exchange via our Birth Certificate and the all capitol name. I know who I am do you?

Section 32 and 52 of the charter says that their codes, rules and regulations apply to them not us. Traffic violations are civil and they are putting people in jail over it taking away their life and liberty. Also see 176, 180 and 423 of the Canadian Criminal Code (which applies to them).

I am in no way saying that I am perfect, matter of fact I know I'm not and neither is anyone else. "Let those of you without sin cast the first stone".

So obviously I did something right with these agreements and I knew they would because it is done in honor and it is true. Can you see anything wrong with that? Getting an agreement with your adversary before they take you to the judgment seats? If I did something wrong then please let me know.

I would tell you, but I assume that you will assume that I am lying.

One must ask themselves why would they take a 54 year old woman who only got agreements with the higher ups and defame her by comparing her to Guru's, the freeman-on-the-land and the terrorist Timothy McVeigh when I am not violent in any way, I don't even own a gun,

"The law doesn't apply to me", "only god's laws apply to me", and other forms that basically say everyone else has to follow one set of laws and you do not put you into the freeman camp.

We are all equal, no one has authority over you or I. If I do damage to another then I am responsible for that damage no one else. Insurance is based on assumption

Yes, the assumption that you probably couldn't afford to take care of a persons' family should you accidentally kill somebody. I assume you don't have a few million lying around somewhere, do you?

The Muslims believe that insurance is gambling and they don't carry a driver's license, is it ok for them because they are Muslim and not ok for me because I am Christian? I think that would be considered discrimination.

I would hope that you and them are equally persecuted to the full extent of the laws you don't think apply to you. That is, if we're talking about in this country.

Christians have been marked for years cause they know the truth and are a threat to their corrupt system, of course they are going to stab at them at every opportunity they have.

Big assumption there.

What you fail to realize is that more and more people are finding the truth out everyday and you guys are going to look like the corrupt idiots, it is scripture.

People are realizing that the media is in on it, they don't print the truth because it is a threat to their goals and that it is slavery.

Assuming truth, assuming conspiracy, and assuming the media is in on it.

I honestly don't care what people think and I knew I was going to be persecuted right from the start as it does say so in the word. I am to store up my treasures in heaven not on earth and that is my intent.

Self-fulfilling assumption. You assume you will be persecuted, so you take actions that result in persecution.

There is a reason why we have been brainwashed all our lives to not read the bible. It has our inheritances and our gifts in it and it tells us exactly what the evil doer's are doing to us. They don't want us to know the truth, of course not it will bring their corrupt system to their knees.

So you assume.

I am not going to give up, I started this and I am going to finish this. It is truth! It cannot be denied. It is factual.

Plenty of assumptions. Lack of facts.

Oh by the way I am not a professional writer I am just a woman who knows the truth and it shall set me free.

Or cause you to spend your life wasting court time.

Now you are probably going to take this letter that I am writing right now and only quoting a few points from it because you do not have the light within you and you are in on it.

No, I used most of them. I skipped some of the biblical references because you started out by saying you not part of a church. Also "Timothy 2:12" or "1 Corinthians 14:35" but I have no real research background on that beyond a few entertaining clips.

Please do your research, don't believe anyone as it says "trust no man" learn for yourself, the information is out there.

Funny how those who do research fail to find all of those failed cases. I assume you mean research from your approved list of documents.

No more assumptions please.

You first.

[notorial dissent]

Assumption is usually based on reality or fact of some form or another, this is all fantasy, and bad grammar.

[minister Catherine]

Tacit (tas-itK), adj. (17c) 1. Implied but not actually expressed, implied by silence or silent acquiescence <tacit understanding> <a tacit admission>. 2. Civil law. Arising by operation of law; constructive <a tacit mortgage. <tacit relocation>. La. Civ. Code art. 3506(30). -- tacitly, adv.

ac·qui·es·cence [ak-wee-es-uhns] Show IPA
noun
1.the act or condition of acquiescing or giving tacit assent; agreement or consent by silence or without objection; compliance (usually followed by to or in ): acquiescence to his boss's demands.
2.Law. such neglect to take legal proceedings for such a long time as to imply the abandonment of a right.

They are not above the law.

roncarilli v. vinceduplice (sorry I don't know the spelling of that case)

Seems to be a bunch of judge defenders in here, are you a bunch of lawyers and prosecutors?

[minister Catherine]

Until such time when Minister Catherine does adequate research into the "Protocols" and admits she has become convinced that they are a blatant anti-semitic Tsarist fraud, she remains at the bottom of the list of people worthy of either consideration or a response.

Her various theories, premises, and theocracies lie there with her.

You are right I have not done adequate research into the Protocols but from what I read most of it came true.

[Cathulhu]

I just love the disingenuous (if poorly spelled) questions--although coming here, she cannot be bothered to read anything about the site, but asks about atheism and legal expertise, preparatory to the "I cannot waste my time with you horrible atheist shills" denunciation before she packs up her lack of intellect and goes home.

Still hasn't answered any of the questions, either. I see a rant and farewell in the near future.

[Burnaby49]

Thank you for your definitions for dummies. Quatloosian readers need experts like you to tell us what words actually mean. Acquiescence means agree? Who'd of thought?

Your position seems to be that if you string a bunch of words together that state a reality you would prefer (as opposed to the actual one we live in) they somehow become law as long as the definition of the words fits the context of your alternate reality. I spent part of this evening delving into this alternate reality by reading some of the documents submitted to the Supreme Court of British Columbia by the British Columbia notaries trying to get Chief Sino Rock to stop pretending he is a notary. The Chief is also very big on the use of the words "tacit" and "acquiesce" as magic talismans to create binding unilateral contracts. He was also considerate enough to explain the meaning of the words in his documents but unfortunately the Supreme Court judge just didn't care.

So yes, you've give us the correct definitions of "acquiescence" and "tacit". Your problem is, and will continue to be, that you won't convince the police and courts that your useage of words, even if correctly defined, creates your own laws that somehow overcome actual laws and precedence.

[wserra]

You are right I have not done adequate research into the Protocols but from what I read most of it came true.

You need to start reading more than just Stormfront. Moreover, the law says that anyone who calls herself "minister Catherine" is prima facie wrong. roncarilli v. vinceduplice (sorry I don't know the spelling of that case).

[Pottapaug1938]

Until such time when Minister Catherine does adequate research into the "Protocols" and admits she has become convinced that they are a blatant anti-semitic Tsarist fraud, she remains at the bottom of the list of people worthy of either consideration or a response.

Her various theories, premises, and theocracies lie there with her.

You are right I have not done adequate research into the Protocols but from what I read most of it came true.

If you believe that, "Minister Catherine", then I have a bridge in Brooklyn which I'll sell to you, REALLY cheap. Indeed, you HAVEN'T done adequate research into the Protocols; because if you had, you would realize that, as AndyK pointed out to you, they have long since been proven to be a forgery created for domestic political reasons by Russian reactionaries. Anyone who claims that "most of it came true" is either 1) three quarts short of a gallon, 2) extremely gullible or 3) both.

[LordEd]

Easy way to make money:

1. Take out a flyer offering a LED flashlight to the household for $5.
2. Require refusal in writing in 10 days.
3. Send out flashlights.
4. Go collect the money.

I wonder why multi-billion dollar businesses don't operate this way. So much easier than waiting for customers to come to you.

[minister Catherine]

http://adask.wordpress.com/2013/12/05/i ... -be-right/

[minister Catherine]

I do not have to justify myself to any of you. You are not my judge, there is only one. We are all equal period. You just want to pick apart everything I say so I am not going to bother. I guarantee that you will pick apart this sentence I just wrote. Pick this apart Genesis 1:29, Romans 11:29. There is your pot answer. BTW you do not get high off marijuana until it is heated. Did you know that? The time is at hand where "every knee shall bow". Even you.

blessings

[minister Catherine]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACVWfcL8c7s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovpqKi449as

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STGmXY7EJ2c

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

minister Belanger has uploaded a new video, entitled:

• Interview with David Lazzarino regarding Sun News Story November 17th 2013: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0qy_AnPgw8

It’s described this way:

The truth about the defaming story David and his editor cooked up with intent to paint Catherine as a threat and potentially Violent and in association with the RCMP claimed terrorists of Robert Menard fame when he was told not to do that 3 times. Catherine is of no association with the Freeman on the land the self god soveriegnty push or the pseudo commercial theory litigant club John Rooke invented, She is a minister of Yahushua the anointed and not a subject of the laws of men. Only puffed up antichrist oppose being able to stand in God's commands and Kingdom. …

The interview appears to be between a newspaper reporter who works for the Canadian Sun news network and ministers Belanger and Catherine.

This news article appears to be the end product of the process (http://www.edmontonsun.com/2013/11/15/i ... n-the-land) and has an attached video with snippets that appear to come from this meeting.

SMS Möwe

[AndyK]

http://adask.wordpress.com/2013/12/05/i ... -be-right/

Uhoh; Alfred Adask -- irrefutable

[ProfHenryHiggins]

I do not have to justify myself to any of you. You are not my judge, there is only one. We are all equal period. You just want to pick apart everything I say so I am not going to bother. I guarantee that you will pick apart this sentence I just wrote. Pick this apart Genesis 1:29, Romans 11:29. There is your pot answer. BTW you do not get high off marijuana until it is heated. Did you know that? The time is at hand where "every knee shall bow". Even you.

blessings

As a demon, I'd say that you don't know your Bible very well, after a brief review of your postings here.