Psam Frank - Sovereign with his own laws and court

[Hanslune]

Or have you not thought this thing through?

Fixed.

Well that's the problem he's been thinking and spewing so much he's forgotten the old maxim:

"A flow of words is no proof of wisdom".

"idiots contradict themselves - and see no harm in it".

[notorial dissent]

I think that should be "and never see it", case in point being ample proof.

[Psam]

I'd like some help from some People with legislative and judicial expertise, in case there Any here.

The ISS Justice Committee is considering a motion to amend its Justice Rules. Here are the way the rules presently look: http://issociety.org/wp-content/uploads ... -Rules.pdf

The motion is to add a new paragraph to the section of the Justice Rules regarding panel chairs replacing vetoed panel members, as follows.

In the specific case of a hearing where wages to be paid to the judiciary are in dispute, all of the above is preempted. The panel chair must consult the Justice Committee to appoint replacements for vetoed panel members. Only committee members who do not serve a legislative or judicial function in the society may participate in the selection process. This means that no members who hold any votes toward any position that is involved in deciding on wages for the judiciary may participate and also neither the Chief of Justice nor any panel chair may participate. The according members of the Justice Committee will use an election by runoff ballot to choose from among their members who to appoint for the panel. If there are not enough eligible or willing members of the Justice Committee to fill vetoed positions on the panel, then other ISS members may be selected as designated otherwise in these rules.

This is based on some research on a Supreme Court of Canada decision which would be good reading to see the reasoning that went into this motion. http://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-cs ... 1/index.do

Anyway, if any One has any advice, it would be cool.

You Guys are awesome. I love You.

[LordEd]

No fee for membership, yet wages are being paid.

Follow the money to find the scam.

[Hyrion]

The ISS Justice Committee is considering a motion to amend its Justice Rules.

Given that ISS is not any form of recognized official Government and it falls under the Jurisdiction of the Government Of Canada - all one really needs to focus on is whether or not what you're doing is unlawful in some way.

In effect: ISS is nothing more then "yet another club" like the old boys club down the street, or the ladies curling league, etc.

In which case, I'd suggest you hire a proper Attorney to overlook the structure and rules of your ISS club to ensure it all complies with the appropriate Canadian Legislation that affects such matters.

Like LordEd, I am rather curious - with no fees or dues being charged - how you pay any salaries. One could speculate they are paid out of donations but wages are expected to be an on-going thing, not something subject to whether or not donations are received. So I'd suggest you have the Lawyer especially look into how you've got that structured.

Anyway, if any One has any advice, it would be cool.

Yup: Whatever the source of income is for ISS - use the first allotment to pay a Lawer to ensure your club is structured lawfully within the Legislation of Canada.

[notorial dissent]

The next point, is that if you are paying wages are you reporting it and witholding the proper taxes according to law?

[Burnaby49]

Psam's voting system might have a chance! He wants his system implemented but, notwithstanding his belief that his wanting it is more than enough to require that Canada jump to it and implement it, he needs the agreement of the rest of us Canadians. Well there may be a chance, slim but his best shot, to get that agreement.

Our new Liberal government has promised to change our current voting system from "first past the post" to something more representative of all voters. We have three major parties fighting it out at every federal election. So a seat in parliament can be won by a candidate with, say, only 35% of the vote if the other two parties each got a lesser percentage. The math extends right to the entire government. The last time the Conservatives got in they had a majority government with 54% of the seats in parliament. However they had less than 40% of the total votes. Same with the Liberals this time. They had 54% of the seats but less than 40% of the vote. Justin Trudeau, our new prime minister, has vowed to change that and bring in a system more representative of the will of the voters by aligning seats more closely to the popular vote. But the conundrum is how to do it, that part is still under discussion.

As this article shows one option is to put various proposed systems to a popular vote in a referendum.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canad ... form-begin

Here's Psam's chance! If he can get his Interactive Electoral System on the ballot then the people of Canada can chose whether they want it or not. Never mind those damned courts or the quibblers here at Quatloos. Let the people decide!

[Psam]

That’s excellent advice from Several of You. Thanks. I have some further requests for advice if You are feeling kind. Here is some background.

I have personally made donations to the ISS, which has a bank account with Vancity.

No judicial action has ever been taken in the ISS in the five years that the society has existed. Any dispute between members that has come to the point where judicial action was requested has ended up with one party either settling the matter or resigning. It is possible that People who are aware of the unreasonable nature of their own actions are not under any illusions that our judicial system won’t be able to discern this.

For the present time, our judiciary are projected to be paid an hourly wage based on time served. Since there has been no judicial action, wages have been minimal, more than accommodated for by the donations I have made to the ISS. Several members of the judiciary have made intentions known to give their time freely in the hypothetical circumstance that there is more work to do than our resources can remunerate for.

If the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) asks for taxes on the money paid to our judiciary by our society, then each member of our judiciary is personally responsible to either declare their own earnings and consensually include them in their own personal filings of taxes with CRA or withhold these earnings as an expression of dissent. They Each are aware of their conscientious choices in this regard.

If the CRA asks the society to withhold part of its wages paid to its judiciary for income tax purposes, then I expect that the ISS will take CRA to court for denial of section 3 Charter rights. This will be taken to the highest level of appeal possible. If the request is denied, then I intend to stop eating until one of three things happens:
1) ISS membership (or membership in any other organization that uses an interactive electoral system) doubles, in which case I will set another date by which if membership hasn’t doubled again I will commence hunger strike again with the same conditions,
2) an ISS judicial panel finds the hunger strike inconsistent with ISS principles and asks to have it stopped, or
3) You have cause to celebrate most assuredly hearing no further lunacy from Me.

Your claims about rex judicata contradict some of what was said by the judge, Master Keighley, during the hearing regarding my petition last October:

“There’s nothing to prevent you from trying again until this court indicates that you can’t try anymore. If the court considers that you’ve serially brought actions which are unsustainable an order can be made under provisions of the Supreme Court Act to prevent you from bringing specific further claims. I’m not going to make that today.”

“Say a charge under the income tax act, a charge under federal drug legislation, a charge under the criminal code or provincial quasi criminal statutes; in those circumstances the court will probably find it far more convincing that Charter issues could be invoked and argued.”

Based on these statements, if a charge under an income tax act is made against the ISS, then a new pursuit of a section 3 Charter defence under quite different circumstances than my petition last October seems to be a possible avenue to pursue.

Burnaby49, kudos on your excellent choice of article regarding electoral politics. The suggestion of a referendum for electoral reform in Canada is a great prospect, sure. However, if it were either refused to include the interactive electoral system as an option in that referendum or the system was included in the referendum but not chosen by the electorate, then that would still not deter Me from my intention to hunger strike. In case any One’s interested, I’ll explain why.

There are three components to your part in determining how the government works:
1) the conditions under which You condone that governance being imposed upon other residents in your land, which for the participants in this forum is, I believe, all conditions, regardless of consent or lack thereof,
2) the taxes You pay to support having that governance imposed upon Others, and
3) the democratic rights You exercise to choose how Others are governed.

The interactive electoral system gives each voter an ongoing level of control over how the government functions, a much more substantial amount of responsibility than the present periodic elections conventionally used. If You oppose this, then You either lack the courage to handle this level of responsibility, or You lack the courage to allow your fellow citizens (People who pay taxes, raise Children, pay mortgages and rent, put food on their tables etc) to be trusted with this level of responsibility. Either way, You are demonstrating qualities that are so woven into the fabric of our very society that You are an intrinsic part of the reason why I find life in this society an experience devoid of any joy.

If our society is so full of People who are so indulgent in cowardice of each Other that They refuse to consider the possibility that each Other can be trusted with a modicum of responsibility, and who also condone having their cowardly form of governance enforced upon every resident of the land whether a responsible denial of consent has been made or not, then I wish to make a clear and irrefutable statement that I find their presence intolerable. I believe that meeting a quiet, peaceful, contented end to my life through starvation makes this statement effectively. Any person who is unaffected by this statement simply compounds my contentment to be departing from a land where their presence is felt.

Of course, if CRA doesn’t come after the ISS for refusal to withhold taxes from its remuneration of its judiciary, then I will continue to work toward bringing CRA to court so that all of the taxes that have been deducted from my income in the several years that the ISS has existed are forwarded in full to the ISS. All of the same conditions of my hunger strike would apply if the courts refused to make this order of the CRA.

So the questions I need help with, if You are still feeling generous with your advice, start with finding a lawyer. Is there any chance I might find a lawyer who agrees that there are periods of time in Canada during which section 3 Charter rights are not available to be exercised? You might personally think that this is not the case, but perhaps there might be a lawyer somewhere who might, for instance, agree that during the month of December, 2015, there was no way for a citizen of Canada to exercise their section 3 Charter rights. There might possibly be a lawyer who might agree that there has not been any conclusive demonstration made that the denial of these rights for periods of time is justifiable in a free and democratic society. So that would be my first request.

Of course, if I were to find a petition signed by every single lawyer registered to the Bar in Canada saying “each signatory of this petition believes that it has been conclusively demonstrated that denial of section 3 Charter rights for periods of time causes society to be more free and/or democratic”, then I would have no choice but to commence proceedings against the CRA under self representation, which would likely lead to the court’s denial of my request, which would lead to my hunger strike and eventually my final end. If it is possible to put such a petition together, it would save Me a lot of searching.

Another question regards my plan for a hunger strike. I would like to be prepared so that if that ever happens, I can execute this plan without interference by any state officials that say it is illegal for Me to be allowed to end my life this way. Perhaps if I inform ISS members that I intend to do so and assure that They know how to contact Me but don’t know where I am, then I could make it happen. That way if ISS membership happens to double, I can start eating again, and if not, I can still communicate an affectionate farewell to the People who gave Me the opportunity to see that an interactive electoral system does actually work despite the closed minded paranoia of the cowards who prefer to see citizens shown the contempt and disrespect of having their electoral decisions handled the same way as swine at a trough.

[LordEd]

No judicial action has ever been taken in the ISS in the five years that the society has existed. Any dispute between members that has come to the point where judicial action was requested has ended up with one party either settling the matter or resigning. It is possible that People who are aware of the unreasonable nature of their own actions are not under any illusions that our judicial system won’t be able to discern this.

Translation: the ISS membership is filled (or more likely sparsely populated) with like minded people. It is unproven in an environment with a broad spectrum of people with different backgrounds and beliefs such as Canada.

[LordEd]

3) You have cause to celebrate most assuredly hearing no further lunacy from Me.

I can also most assuredly say that nobody wishes harm to you, self inflicted or otherwise. I believe that your application, belief, and promoting in this ISS system is detrimental to an already good (not perfect) society. Continuing to promote could lead to others with a weak mind to buy-in and reduce their own quality of life in the process. I would prefer you to see our point of view, bit since that is likely impossible, my goal is simply to respond with arguments that others deciding on your reasoning can consider.

[The Observer]

Another question regards my plan for a hunger strike. I would like to be prepared so that if that ever happens, I can execute this plan without interference by any state officials that say it is illegal for Me to be allowed to end my life this way.

My advice would be to remove yourself to a remote and uninhabited location where state authorities are least likely to expect to find you. I would think the Northwest Territories would have numerous spots, especially during the winter, that would make a state search for you prohibitive. Take care to select a place that has little or no access by roads, airstrips or docking facilities. Choose clothing that tends to blend in with the environment, this will assist in defeating anyone who is trying to find you to prevent your starvation. I have read anecdotes that claim that some people in the latter stages of starvation tend to make involuntary utterances or lose their willpower and start taking sustenance, so you may want to consider using duct tape to seal your mouth; I would think duct taping your eyes shut would also help prevent you from locating food if you irrationally try to stop your fast.

Also, you should take care not to let any relatives, friends or associates know of your plan so they cannot provide the state with that information to find you. Ideally, if you had one person that you could ultimately trust to not betray your starvation, it would be far easier for to bury you in a sealed container underground, say in the back yard. I doubt state officials would realize that you had located yourself in such a place.

But I suspect that you will reject the above advice. You want your starvation to be a public spectacle in the hopes you can gain attention and notoriety in the mistaken belief that you can force government and society to implement your demands.

[LordEd]

The interactive electoral system gives each voter an ongoing level of control over how the government functions, a much more substantial amount of responsibility than the present periodic elections conventionally used. If You oppose this, then You either lack the courage to handle this level of responsibility, or You lack the courage to allow your fellow citizens (People who pay taxes, raise Children, pay mortgages and rent, put food on their tables etc) to be trusted with this level of responsibility. Either way, You are demonstrating qualities that are so woven into the fabric of our very society that You are an intrinsic part of the reason why I find life in this society an experience devoid of any joy.

Do you have a mortgage, children, and a job to put food on the table? Or is your survival based on the various support systems instituted by the government you despise under the direction of the people you call cowards?

If you do have all of the above, how do you have the time to establish diplomatic relations and make agreements with other trading countries, such as the US, Mexico, Russia, China, and Iceland? You have, as a sovereign alternative governing system, done that right?

If our society is so full of People who are so indulgent in cowardice of each Other that They refuse to consider the possibility that each Other can be trusted with a modicum of responsibility, and who also condone having their cowardly form of governance enforced upon every resident of the land whether a responsible denial of consent has been made or not, then I wish to make a clear and irrefutable statement that I find their presence intolerable.

As opposed to cowardly insisting to micromanage representatives with a continuous voting system over every minute decision.

[Hyrion]

If You oppose this, then You either lack the courage to handle this level of responsibility, or You lack the courage to allow your fellow citizens (People who pay taxes, raise Children, pay mortgages and rent, put food on their tables etc) to be trusted with this level of responsibility.

There's that extreme position again. There are other possibilities such as the belief that giving the Government a few years to put their plans in motion and see some of them through to completion is a reasonable position. That six months is far too short a time frame to do anything meaningful on such a grand scale as a Society with a population of 35 (or so) million people.

If the CRA asks the society to withhold part of its wages paid to its judiciary for income tax purposes, then I expect that the ISS will take CRA to court for denial of section 3 Charter rights.

And again, predictably you will loose for the simple matter that your section 3 Charter rights are not being infringed upon.

I intend to stop eating

As another has expressed - this is simply public postering. I certainly do not believe for an instant that you will fast for any period of time let alone till you pass from lack of nurishment. You are attempting to force your position onto others again. People will join ISS if they want to belong to your club - very few will join for the sole reason being to stop you from starving yourself.

Your claims about rex judicata contradict some of what was said by the judge, Master Keighley, during the hearing regarding my petition last October

I seriously doubt that. More likely you've misunderstood what was said - whether or not deliberately is up to you to determine but I suggest you re-read what was stated in the context that the author was making it. Or in the alternative, ask for clarification within specific context so said author can clarify.

if a charge under an income tax act is made against the ISS, then a new pursuit of a section 3 Charter defence under quite different circumstances than my petition last October seems to be a possible avenue to pursue

Possible, but not likely. I suspect your claim that you can't have the voting system you want as infringing your section 3 Charter rights will be ignored while the Court is focused on evaluating whether or not you/ISS have appropriately withheld/paid taxes.

included in the referendum but not chosen by the electorate, then that would still not deter Me from my intention to hunger strike

Exactly: you are trying to force your will on others. You are not willing to accept a greater body of Society choosing a different path to you. I would not be surprised if the greater body of ISS choose a different path to you that would result in you either disbanding ISS or kicking those dissenting opinions out of the club.

If our society is so full of People who are so indulgent in cowardice of each Other that They refuse to consider the possibility that each Other can be trusted with a modicum of responsibility

You've got the same responsibilities as the rest of us: to work peacefully with your fellow Societal members to reach reasonable consensus on how we're going to interact and sustain both our Society and ourselvs. Understand that consensus is general agreement - that does not mean everyone must agree. And yet, you attempt to hold yourself hostage via starvation if the rest of us do not comply with your demands/desires. It seems to me that in choosing to force instead of work with - you have already failed in part of your current responsibilities - yet you claim to want more.

• Why is attempting to structure your ISS group as a political party of Canada and trying to convince others your way is better so poisonous to you?

cowardly form of governance enforced upon every resident of the land

Move outside it's geographic jurisdiction - and it will no longer be forced upon you. In the alternative, work with the system to try and change it. Such change has happened in the past and with slow growth it'll happen again.

a responsible denial of consent

No one is going to accept your "responsible denial of consent" not to be held accountable to the Law that states murder is not acceptable. If you can't understand why that is - then perhaps you have some soul searching to do.

my contentment to be departing from a land

Instead of starving yourself, you could just move.

Is there any chance I might find a lawyer who agrees that there are periods of time in Canada during which section 3 Charter rights are not available to be exercised?

Never say never - and I've seen some Lawyers choose what I would consider to be mighty strange battles. However, I'd expect it to be a small minority of the Legal field who would believe in your litigation claim.

a petition signed by every single lawyer registered to the Bar in Canada saying “each signatory of this petition believes that it has been conclusively demonstrated that denial of section 3 Charter rights for periods of time causes society to be more free and/or democratic”

That's not going to happen. I believe most Lawyers simply do not view your section 3 Charter rights are being denied. So you'll have to convince them of that first before they consider the second part of that petition statement. Keep in mind: You've failed to convince us, some unknown percentage who have no career path in the Legal field.

I can execute this plan without interference by any state officials that say it is illegal for Me to be allowed to end my life this way.

I don't believe suicide is yet illegal in Canada. As a result, I suspect you have no concerns there. But there are plenty of busy bodies in Society that will try and convince you suicide is not the right path and they will probably try and interfer. But don't you worry, because they can't lawfully force you to stop - for example if they tie you to a bed and force feed you, they'd be up for criminal charges of unlawful confinement.

[Psam]

As opposed to cowardly insisting to micromanage representatives with a continuous voting system over every minute decision.

Is it cowardly for an employer to wish to retain the discretion to terminate the employment of an employee who is not doing their job properly in a time period less than four years?

A citizen participates in the selection as to who to hire with their vote in an election. A citizen pays their employee through their taxes. An elected representative is an employee of the citizens.

Is there any employer anywhere else in the work force that would be satisfied to be required by law to wait four years before being able to terminate the employment of an employee?

The fact that I work 40 hours a week, pay rent, and buy food for more than just Me is not relevant to this discussion as far as I'm concerned. Being subject to the governance of an institution logically yields the right to have an equal, meaningful voice in determining how that government operates. The indignities that unemployed People are subject to saddens Me, but that is also not relevant. Neither, really, is the fact that many People (lawyers and bankers included) do far more harm than good to the world and our society with the work They are paid to do.

[arayder]

As opposed to cowardly insisting to micromanage representatives with a continuous voting system over every minute decision.

Is it cowardly for an employer to wish to retain the discretion to terminate the employment of an employee who is not doing their job properly in a time period less than four years?

A citizen participates in the selection as to who to hire with their vote in an election. A citizen pays their employee through their taxes. An elected representative is an employee of the citizens.

Is there any employer anywhere else in the work force that would be satisfied to be required by law to wait four years before being able to terminate the employment of an employee?. . .

Frank, that's twisted logic by which you haughtily put yourself up to have greater authority than the people.

You didn't hire a single one of Canada's representatives and you don't have the authority to fire any of them either.

Get real, will ya'?

[Hyrion]

Is it cowardly for an employer to wish to retain the discretion to terminate the employment of an employee who is not doing their job properly in a time period less than four years?

The thing is: you're not the employer. You're one of 35+ million employers. You want to fire someone in Politics? You can not do so on your own, it requires a vote.

You want to change the rules to be able to "fire someone by consensus" sooner? So be it, go through the appropriate political campaign to get that change. If there are enough of the 35+ million employers who feel as you do, then no one will be able to stop that change.

A citizen participates in the selection as to who to hire with their vote in an election. A citizen pays their employee through their taxes. An elected representative is an employee of the citizens.

And yet, at the same time you - the citizen - are powerless to act alone. This is the core understanding you need to achieve.

Is there any employer anywhere else in the work force that would be satisfied to be required by law to wait four years before being able to terminate the employment of an employee?

Ultimately, the owner that started the business gets to make the rules of their business so long as those rules conform with the Laws of Society. There's a big difference between a dictator (which pretty much describes a company) and a Democracy. You, the single individual, do not get to change the rules for the rest of us just because you feel like it no matter how much you want to be the dictator.

Being subject to the governance of an institution logically yields the right to have an equal, meaningful voice in determining how that government operates.

And you do: convince enough of the rest of us that your change is for the better of Society and you'll add our voices to yours and get the change you want.

Let me be crystal clear on the employer/employee analogy:

I do NOT view myself as an actual employer of any of the public officials. You want to be a clear employer? Start a business and hire someone. While employer can be used as a rough analogy, it is not a direct definition comparison. There are BIG differences between a Citizen and an Employer. BIG differences between a company and a Government.

[wserra]

I believe that meeting a quiet, peaceful, contented end to my life through starvation makes this statement effectively.

Please be careful that you don't gain weight as a result of your death fast. We have experience with another a nutcase who did.

[notorial dissent]

Psammy, just when I foolishly think you might possibly actually be semi serious, you go and post 1445 words of absolutely drivelous nonsense.

No one here wishes you an ill, no one here takes you seriously either. This whole proposal from start to end is the veriest of nonsense and has exactly -0- chance of ever coming to fruition except with a collection of like minded fruitcakes as yourself.

The only question I came away with from this waste of electrons was are you going to repeatedly stamp oo widdle feets and hold yo breffs until you turns all blue and purple??? That'll show them and is as equally an adult response as what you have proposed.

Now go away and take your nonsense and try and impress someone who gives a damn.

[Burnaby49]

I believe that meeting a quiet, peaceful, contented end to my life through starvation makes this statement effectively.

Please be careful that you don't gain weight as a result of your death fast. We have experience with another a nutcase who did.

When he threatened to starve himself to death earlier this year he planned to do so by guzzling maple syrup so weight gain is a distinct possibility. Personally I'd suggest just using regular pancake/waffle syrup, maple syrup is very expensive. Then again if he's checking out maybe he just doesn't care about the cost.

[Dr. Caligari]

I don't care how he does it, so long as he stops posting his endless, mindless screeds.