"Chief Rock Sino General" - Freeman guru-to-be?

[Burnaby49]

Hope I'll be able to get in.

Don't be silly-- you're the Helen Thomas of sov events!

Thanks a bunch but I think I'll go with the Cletus Beauregard Stonewall Yokel look.

[Burnaby49]

This case is more important than even I realized. It is going to be heard at the Supreme Court of Canada! Tālis Bŗauns just said so! Wait, isn't the SCC in Ottawa? Screw that, too cold. I'll just have to take my chances at the Supreme Court of British Columbia. Tālis is somewhat confused about the date too. He seems to think he'll have to take the hot tub time machine back to Friday last week.

Sino General
2 hrs · Vancouver ·

.Just finished on camera interview with the Province. .. photoshoot. Interview is done. So should be out tmrw or online today. Tmrw either way in the thoughts of many parties is ... this will determine alot of things in regards to our status as a people and a nation. Do they respect our relationship or do they disregard who we are

Like · Share

20 people like this..

Tasha-Tanya Jacko So interested to see the outcome

Bryan Parker Sino General, please make sure your interview finds its way onto Tactical Sovereignty.

Chris Evan Keep us posted

Tālis Bŗauns What court, tommorrow?

Sino General Smithe at supreme Court

Tālis Bŗauns Owen Smith SCC, March 20th?

Steven Willard I am very interested, How can i see it?

Want to see it Steven? Nothing easier! Just get up and go. Walk through main entrance to courthouse, past the sheriff at the desk to the right and check the bulletin boards to the right just before the registry entrance for the day's schedule. I'm guessing the Chief gets the fifth floor.

The Chief seems confidant, he's performing on stage tonight!

http://thecultch.com/event/talking-stic ... ary-music/

I'll pass, it's $20 and I get to see him for free tomorrow.

[Jeffrey]

his will determine alot of things in regards to our status as a people and a nation

All those delusions.

[Burnaby49]

And the reports are starting;

http://aptn.ca/news/2015/02/27/b-c-nota ... ry-public/

Not bad reporting overall considering APTN is an advocacy group that promotes the Chief's views. Our own Ron Usher even gets a few quotes in.

I checked the Province (local paper, not the provicial government) website. Not reported yet.

[Burnaby49]

Turns out that the notaries actually owe the Chief a pile of money! It's right there on the Chief's Facebook;

Sino General
1 hr ·

.“I follow the law of peace and the governments of the (Six Nations) nation,” he said. “Our government’s system was here thousands of years before they (Canadian government) got here. I am exempt from Canadian law. Thanks Brandi Morin


B.C. Notary Society sues Cayuga Nation man for acting as notary public - APTN National NewsBrandi Morin APTN National News A Six Nations man now living in B.C. is facing a contempt of court civil suit for practicing as a [...]aptn.ca..



Like · Share

Glen Atwell As a Six Nations Band Member you have a lien on the Law Society because " In the 1840s, the Crown actually invested funds it held for the Six Nations in bonds the Law Society of Upper Canada was floating to pay for the building of Osgoode Hall. When the Law Society repaid the money, it went into general crown revenues."41 mins · Like

Now how could a man with a seal like that not be a notary?

[Burnaby49]

Now you can watch the Chief's interview on video;

http://www.theprovince.com/index.html

I can't link you to the exact spot because I've overused my free viewings and it kicks me out. He's the "Going Rogue" tab at the top and there is a link to a video just below.

[The Observer]

I watched the Chief's interview and have these observations:

(1) I think that the interviewer was not entirely considerate of the Chief's situation; it appeared that he had pulled the Chief out of the bathroom right after he had washed his hair. Not really fair to force the Chief to conduct an interview with his wet head hastily rolled up in towel and only a woman's bathrobe to cover up the rest of him. Apparently the Canadian press are quite aggressive in getting interviews.

(2) The Chief at one point opines on the possible outcome of his trial; either way he believes that the result will "sorta" have an impact. Either the judge's ruling against Sino will "sorta" show disregard for whatever agreements that Sino maintains exist between the Native Peoples and the Queen,or a ruling in his favor will "sorta" show that this a a precedent-setting case. "Sorta?" It seems that the Chief is hedging his bets - or maybe this is a subtle admission on the Chief's part that he may be in over his head on this litigation. And, oh, he has no idea how the judge will rule. How modest of the Chief - I think he knows exactly how the judge is going to rule.

(3) Sino thinks that the Canadian requirements for notaries is unnecessary and discriminatory. After all, you don't need to go to school or meet the artificial standards imposed by the government just to witness a signing, and verify the persons are who they say they are. In the Chief's world, you already have these abilities and you just need to be a person in "good standing." But unfortunately the Chief doesn't explain how you can demonstrate you meet that criteria - my guess is that you just ask yourself if you are a person in good standing, and if you tell yourself yes, well then you are a notary. Of course some wiseacre, like Burnaby, will probably point out that this is exactly the reason why we have educational and legal requirements to help establish if you are a person in good standing without having to worry about whether your personal approval of yourself was not due to bias in your favor.

[Burnaby49]

Wiseacre49 has a few comments. First his signings weren't as innocent as he makes out. He seems to be implying he just witnessed a few things, signing wills, things like that. Just verifying parties. It went deeper than that. He signed documents as a fake notary for what appear to have been possible extortion schemes. I'm not saying he was a participant in these schemes but he witnessed the documents. The one I have fully documented was a series of demands sent to the Sandbar restaurant in Vancouver. I wrote about it here;

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=9966&p=169981&hili ... ar#p169975

They tried to extort payment for what seem to have been fake claims of illness resulting from the restaurant feeding them ground glass without them noticing. They did the whole series of unilateral agreements, claims of injuries not verified by any medical review, threats of escalation of damages. I got these from the documents entered as evidence by the Society of Notaries in their first court hearing where they got the cease and desist. I believe the Society got them from the restaurant.

He also notarized the documents used by the Nanaimo three which they used to pretend to be peace officers. That ended up in a batch of criminal convictions. In fact I think all of the Freeman court hearings that I've attended trials had documents notified by the Chief in the evidence somewhere. From what I've seen he is an active participant in the Vancouver Freeman community and is their go-to guy for notarial services. Not something Ron Usher would approve from notaries who are actually members of the Society.

As I've noted in this discussion he is a strong proponent of unilateral contracts and, when he was trying the three letter five letter unilateral contract scheme to get out of paying his line of credit to the TD bank, he notarized his own documents. He can hardly be considered an innocent participant just witnessing documents in that one.

As far as winning or losing is concerned the Chief offered the court a way out during the interview. He said that if the court decided in his favour then the whole edifice of Crown control over aboriginals would collapse because he would have shown that the Queen's laws did not apply to him and, by extension, other natives. However if the court decided in favour of the notaries that meant the judge was violating all of the past treaties the natives had signed in good faith. The poor judge was really going to be over a barrel except, except . . . The judge could just quash without rending a decision. That seemed like the ideal solution to the Chief. Except that if the application is quashed that is in fact a decision in favour of the Chief since the notaries would have lost. And the Chief was only trying to help.

I suspect the Chief will be attired at court in the full regalia he was sporting for the interview. So I have a suggestion for Ron Usher. He has to have a headgear at least equal to the Chief's. I have given this some thought and have a suggestion. The Chief made a long posting a while ago proving that the white man's law was Admiralty law;

https://www.facebook.com/notes/chiefroc ... 3007484280

So why not just admit to the truth of that and take the concept and run with it. Here's your chapeau Ron!

[Jeffrey]

His interview is painful to watch. He can't even come up with a verbal explanation for his actions.

[notorial dissent]

Chiefy has two problems, he can't tell the truth as that would be openly admitting to fraud, and he isn't smart enough to keep his lies fantasies straight. So he's in a bit of a bind. He gets no sympathy from me, and I am certain he'll get none from the notaries since he is a threat to the integrity of the system.

[Burnaby49]

His interview is painful to watch. He can't even come up with a verbal explanation for his actions.

You're not the only one with that thought. From the comments to the Province article;

Preston Dumont · Top Commenter · Columbia Academy of Radio, Television and Recording Arts
As a fellow fn I hate to say that this guy could barely make his argument to a reporter let alone a judge. Also he is far from his traditional territory and has no authority to sign anything on behalf of any nation that his decision to support affect and lastly there is almost no treaties that have been signed in bc besides a couple

But one of Canada's greatest legal experts rises to the Chief's defense

Harry Wombat · FollowFollowing · Dumbed Down Collegiate
Preston Dumont,

Your comment displays your ignorance. Is it intentional? Are you a troll, lawyer, cop? Because, here in REALITY, you're demonstrating an undeniable ability to pull ":facts out of your a%#".

First of all, if you read the article, he is from the Cayuga Nation which is nowhere near B.C. As an original he is not within the JURISDICTION of the corporation known as CANADA, or any other corporations commonly referred to as provinces.

Secondly, he never claimed he was signing anything on behalf of his nation, but, merely as a member of it. If you bake a cake, does it mean you are officially baking cake "on behalf" of Canada because you are a Canadian?

Finally, his nation does have treaties which essentially say "Your laws don't apply to our nation, and our laws don't apply to your nation as both nations are sovereign."

The treaties signed make it illegal for Canada to impose it's laws on an original (native) unless they choose to give up their sovereignty, which he hasn't.

As for this constant reference to Meads vs. Meads made by the media in this article as well, what is not shared by the media is that the quotes taken are from an OPINION written by Rooke, and not a FINDING or determination of fact or law.

Anyone can announce their opinion, even Rooke, but let's stick to demonstrable facts.

Meads is just a personal opinion without any relevance or weight of law? I guess the notaries are going to look like monkeys when they cite it! You might ask, who is Harry Wombat? Check the Chief's Facebook, Harry is some guy avidly "liking" all the Chief's posts.

This does not go unrebutted;

Preston Dumont · Top Commenter · Columbia Academy of Radio, Television and Recording Arts
Harry dingbat. You obviously don't know the facts. Fact one is you do not have the traditional right to be practicing your beliefs in someone else's tradition territories and this is sto:lo territory. This is not a treaty of your government this is law in our traditional ways which we respect way more then Canadian law.

Second fact dingbat he is talking about sovereignty he has within his traditional 6 nations territory which he is far from. Yes we are all sovereign nations however Canadian laws "dont" apply on reserve.
Fact three he is representing himself and it in my opinion he better do a better job explaining himself to a judge because he did a poor job with the reporter. Fact 4 is BC is unceded land there has never been any singing over of lands to Canada unlike the majority of the first nations out east. There have been some recent treaties but not in the same historical scam Canada pulled...it is actually opposite. Anyways dingbat there's some first nations 101for you

There are a pile of new supporting comments on the Chief's Facebook page. Unfortunately they are more the "Good luck, tell me how it works out" variety than "See you there".

Well Chief, from at least one loyal follower, see you there!

[LordEd]

Found this article on the chief. A few interesting bits.

http://www.24news.ca/the-news/canada-ne ... sed-notary

One of the documents purportedly notarized by General appears to be a court order made “before Adjudicator Hajistahénhway” and signed by Hajistahénhway, ordering the defendant, the Haisla Nation Council, to pay the plaintiff “$100,000,000 in fine one ounce silver bullion 99.9 per cent and/or the equivalent in the lawful currency of the day.”

Roger D. McConchie, lawyer for the Haisla Nation, said he received a series of documents seemingly notarized, stamped and signed by Hajistahénhway.

“I got some incoherent, bizarre gibberish delivered to my office several times,” McConchie said. “It’s obviously, to someone who knows the legal system anyway, less authentic than Monopoly money.”

A commercial lawyer in Vancouver who reviewed some of the case material said the documents purportedly notarized by General had “an equal amount” of legal authority as a napkin. However, he added, “it’s definitely less useful than a napkin. At least you can do something with a napkin.”

He has some support apparently:

Lisa Monchalin, a Kwantlen Polytechnic University professor of criminology who plans to attend court Friday, believes General has a valid point about jurisdiction, saying: “International law applies here, not Canadian law, and Canadian courts do not have jurisdiction here.”

[The Observer]

One of the documents purportedly notarized by General appears to be a court order made “before Adjudicator Hajistahénhway” and signed by Hajistahénhway,...

Adjuicator? I hadn't seen that one before. Does an ajudicator trump a chief when native people are involved? And even more important, how much did the Chief charge the plaintiff for those documents (if the Chief was not the plaintiff)? And how does the the plaintiff feel about paying out good money for gibberish instead of napkins?

Lisa Monchalin, a Kwantlen Polytechnic University professor of criminology who plans to attend court Friday, believes General has a valid point about jurisdiction,...

Not sure why anyone should think that a criminology professor is a go-to source about jurisdiction and treaties. They should interview her later after the Chief ends up in prison.

[notorial dissent]

Chiefy is just another of the clowns thinking that they can play with words and get away with things.

I can't imagine why a criminology professor would think they would have a clue about the variety of law involved here, or why in any way shape or form they would think anything about jurisdiction.

[LordEd]

Our professor likes to sing with the chief:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSuZpR1qKo4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLVHcxVM8ZY

[wserra]

Lisa Monchalin, a Kwantlen Polytechnic University professor of criminology who plans to attend court Friday, believes General has a valid point about jurisdiction,...

Not sure why anyone should think that a criminology professor is a go-to source about jurisdiction and treaties.

Continuing that quote:

Lisa Monchalin, a Kwantlen Polytechnic University professor of criminology who plans to attend court Friday, believes General has a valid point about jurisdiction, saying: “International law applies here, not Canadian law, and Canadian courts do not have jurisdiction here."

Canadian courts don't have jurisdiction in Vancouver? And what, pray tell, does "international law" have to say about who can notarize documents? In any event, does the good professor think that you can just pull some thick tome entitled "International Law" from the shelves of a law school library and look it up? What does she think "international law" is?

Never mind. Rhetorical.

[Burnaby49]

Just back from a long day in court. The Chief looked resplendent! Dressed in the same outfit he had in the interview. I'll write it up but it might take a bit. I have twelve pages of single spaced closely written notes on an 8X10 pad and a severely cramped writing hand. Quatloos was mentioned a number of times and the Chief commented about me three times to the court! Pointing me out while doing it!

Anyhow hearing done and decision deferred until 9AM next Thursday.

[Jeffrey]

Quatloos was mentioned a number of times and the Chief commented about me three times to the court! Pointing me out while doing it!

Oh god we've been compromised! Burn everything, shred all the documents, drink all the booze!

[LordEd]

That gives me time to set up the betting pools.

Number of minutes until Chief pulled the racist card. (5 quatloos on 12 minutes)

Number of (known) freeman attendees in the crowd (1 quatloo on 1).

All wagers to be decided by Burnaby the Green. Polls close on Burnaby's report.

[Burnaby49]

That gives me time to set up the betting pools.

Number of minutes until Chief pulled the racist card. (5 quatloos on 12 minutes)

Number of (known) freeman attendees in the crowd (1 quatloo on 1).

All wagers to be decided by Burnaby the Green. Polls close on Burnaby's report.

Please, no japery, this is a serious business but, yes, I did count the Chief's supporters. I used to be an accountant. This is the photograph that appeared on page 7 of today's Province;



Althought the one in the Province was better, covered the table top and the Chief's hands too. It was slated to be on the front page but the Chief was robbed by an editorial decision to put a pointless picture of an ex provincial premier's house on the front page. A picture of a house? I thought they were trying to sell newspapers.