Majeres' Musings

Poll results from Environics  :)  Thanks.

Poll taken from  March 11 to  April 6, just short of the Gomery re-opening to the public.

Libs at       36

Cons at     30

NDP at      19

Bloc at      11

Other at     4

The Liberals still with a slight lead for a minority government if an election was called.

No wonder Harper is acting rather sheepish trying to say that, " Canadians do not want an election". 

It is actually patronizing Canadians by saying its ok if you are not up to date on the Gomery Inquiry, most people are not, and when you do, you will end up agreeing with me that there should be an election.  How is  that  for telling  Canadians  HOW  to think  by  a  leading  "how to think"  statement.

I find Harper so transparent its incredable.  He patronizes my intelligence hoping I link that to him and his ideals  in a good way.

NDP still do not count.  There is no massive increase in poverty, or old people fearing for their pensions, or those hoping for a massive NDP soak it to the rich  massive Canada Pension Plan  raise.

The tree hugging NDPer's  have not had a population explosion yet either.

The NDP still have not one single galvanizing issue that can propel them.  They had the chance with individual soverign rights last election but did not persue it.  They would have lost the old biased peoples' vote.

Oh yes, the Liberals are still a bunch of robots controlled by the PMO and are only allowed to say the Libs political buzzword phrases.

Which Devil do I throw my vote at?  None until a Party promises in EXACT terms an increase in MY personal soverignty, not my neighbours, not the company I might work for, not some small segment of society that is far removed, BUT ME......the lowly voter, the actual person who has to get out and vote.

So all the parties can kiss my lilly white hairy butt.

cheers all :) majere

Mood: Contemplating a book on english grammer......grammarian roger....nope
Listening to: my wife talking about pure maple fudge.

If I know the Chinese, the Chinese are planning the following with keeping in mind that their leadership thinks in terms of generations and generational leaders while the Yanks think about winning the next election, ok.

The Chinese will bleed the Americans militarily and therefore financially.  They are well aware of the Americans' financial situation in that they are on an economic downturn. 

The Chinese will bleed the Yanks with Taiwan.  The Chinese will bleed the Yanks in the future after Taiwan, and after that, and after that.  Always staying with expensive conventional warfare....for the Americans.  Economicaly China is on the upswing.  Bleed the Yanks slowly over what??....the next half generation, say 25 years.

Article below:
By Jim Yardley and Thom Shanker The New York Times
Friday, April 8, 2005

Officials say equation has shifted in event of a Taiwan crisis ZHANJIANG, China When the flagship of the U.S. Navy's 7th Fleet came into view on a recent Monday afternoon, a Chinese naval band onshore quickly began playing as two rows of Chinese sailors snapped into formation and workers hurriedly finished tacking down a red carpet.

The command ship, the Blue Ridge, answered with music from its own band and raised a Chinese flag below Old Glory.

But the most apt symbolism in the stagecraft of the ceremonial visit came when the two navies staged a tug-of-war - evoking their emerging competition in East Asia.

While the American military is consumed with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, global terrorism, and the threat of nuclear proliferation in North Korea and Iran, China is presenting a new and strategically different security concern to America in the western Pacific, as well as to Japan and Taiwan, Pentagon and military officials say.

China, these officials say, has smartly analyzed the strengths and weaknesses of the American military and focused its growing defense spending on weapons systems that could exploit the perceived weaknesses in case the United States ever needs to respond to fighting in Taiwan.

This rapid military modernization is the major reason President George W. Bush has warned the European Union not to lift its arms embargo against China.

A decade ago, U.S. military planners dismissed the threat of a Chinese attack against Taiwan as a 160-kilometer infantry swim. Now, the Pentagon believes that China has purchased or built enough amphibious assault ships, submarines, fighter jets and short-range missiles to pose an immediate threat to Taiwan and to any American force that might come to Taiwan's aid.

Even the most hawkish officials at the Pentagon do not believe China is preparing for an imminent invasion of Taiwan. Nor do analysts believe China is any match for the United States military.

But as neighboring North Korea is erratically trying to play the nuclear card, China is quietly challenging America's reach in the western Pacific by concentrating strategically on conventional forces.

"They are building their force to deter and delay our ability to intervene in a Taiwan crisis," said Eric McVadon, a former military attaché at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing. "What they have done is cleverly develop some capabilities that have the prospect of attacking our niche vulnerabilities."

Japan, America's closest ally in East Asia, and China's rival for regional dominance, is also watching China's buildup. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi echoed Bush by warning Europe against removing the arms embargo. A think tank affiliated with Japan's Defense Ministry criticized China's increased military spending and warned it was rushing to prepare for possible conflict with Taiwan - an assertion China sharply denied.

The growing friction between Japan and China, fueled by rising nationalism in both countries, is just one of the political developments exacerbating tensions in East Asia.

In March, China passed a controversial new "anti-secession" law authorizing a military attack if top leaders believe Taiwan moves too far toward independence - a move that brought hundreds of thousands of people in Taiwan out in protest last month.

China's most recent military white paper also alarmed U.S. policymakers because it mentioned the United States by name for the first time since 1998. It stated that the American presence in the region "complicated security factors."

China, meanwhile, blamed the United States and Japan for meddling in a domestic Chinese matter when those two countries recently issued a security statement that listed peace in Taiwan as a "common strategic objective."

"The potential for a miscalculation or an incident here has actually increased, just based on the rhetoric over the past six months to a year," one U.S. intelligence analyst in Washington said.

At the welcoming ceremony for the Blue Ridge here at the hometown of China's South Sea Fleet, the American commanding officer, Captain J. Stephen Maynard, and his Chinese counterpart, Senior Captain Wen Rulang, sidestepped questions about the anti-secession law and military tensions.

Wen, Asked about China's military buildup and how America should view it, praised the U.S. Navy as the most modern in the world.

"As for China," he said, "our desire is to upgrade China's self-defense capabilities."

But in China's view, self-defense involves Taiwan, which it regards as a breakaway province and which the United States has, by treaty, suggested it would help defend. In 1996, when China fired missiles in warning over the Taiwan Strait prior to Taiwanese elections, President Bill Clinton responded by sending a battle group to a position near Taiwan. Then, China could do nothing about it. Now, analysts say, it can.

In fact, U.S. carriers responding to a crisis would now initially have to operate at least 800 kilometers, or 500 miles, from Taiwan, which would reduce the number of jet fighter sorties they could launch and cut their loiter time in international airspace near Taiwan.

This is because China now has a modernizing fleet of submarines, including new Russian-made nuclear subs that can fire antiship missiles from a submerged position. America would first need to subdue these submarines before moving ships close to Taiwan.

China launched 13 attack submarines between 2002 and 2004, a period when it also built 23 ships that can ferry armored vehicles and troops across the 160-kilometer-wide strip of water to Taiwan.

"Their amphibious assault ship building alone equals the entire U.S. navy shipbuilding since 2002," said an intelligence official in Washington. "It definitely represents a significant increase in overall capacity."

In the worse-case scenario for a Taiwan crisis, any delay in U.S. carriers reaching the island would mean that the United States would initially depend on fighter jets and bombers stationed on Guam and Okinawa, while Chinese forces could use their amphibious ships to traverse the narrow Strait. Some U.S. military analysts believe China could now defeat Taiwan before America could arrive at the scene.

cheers :) majere

Mood: Don't know
Listening to: Horrible questions

What an idiot. 

If there was an election now there would still be a Liberal minority elected.

Why don't you think Harper is pulling the pin....... He can't win yet.

Stupid question for stupid people so they can express an un-informed opinion.

Kathleen, why don't you ask which is the lesser of the two evils......Libs or Cons?

Or ask, is Ontario going to change from Lib to Con en masse, is this the time they switch?  How will the West feel?  Will there be alienation in the East regardless of who wins?

She could have asked better questions.

majere

Mood: very good as all emotions are a personall choice
Listening to: politcs which just started on CBC Newsworld Canada

Below is King James Version of Creation.

Note lines 11 and 12.

My comments prior.

Does anyone grow the seed bearing, grow anywhere in the world cannabis to use its god given seeds for eating, baking, oil, fuel? ........ NO

Does anyones' religious organization promote gods given right in this manner.....NO

Does anyoness' religous organization promote freedom of practicing ones religion in ones country.........YES

Therein "lies"  the hypocrisy.  Only religously promote what one is allowed to by elected officials bias and prejudices.  Religously do not fight back.....I guess the Crusuades under gods name was wrong.  I guess all those wars in the bible under gods name was wrong......  Oh wait, the excuse for that is freedom of ones choice maybe?  and that god did not order it as we have been told in the bible....Oh wait, freedom of choice?

Where is my freedom of choice?

The bible promotes a "choosen man processed"  poisen to ones brain called wine (alcohol which kills thousands every year) versus picking a seed bearing herbal flower as one is walking along and baking with it which has never killed a single person in recorded time.

King James Version (Creation)

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

Have a good day everyone.....and I sincerely mean all people....

majere
roger roeder

God is the supreme being
If you praise him for the good things
You have to blame him for the bad things

goddamnit

majere

Mood: Torn between the endless drudgery of housework and the up feeling of the in-laws
Listening to: General Hospital, my wife, and CBC Newsworld

McGuinty phones Harper.

McGuinty complains of Ontario not recieving enough money in transfer payments even though Ontario is considered a "have" province and must share with the "have not" provinces.  Sounds fair right?

The win win comes from:

Harper stating that Ontario will recieve several more billion in transfer payments if they are elected as a majority government.  This might entice the Ontario electorate to leave the devil they know to vote for the devil with the promise of MONEY.  Harper and his Conservatives win by picking up some Ontario seats.

McGuinty wins by, if there is an election within his Provincial mandate can use the extra billions to "purchase" votes with the taxpayers own money  ensureing  another  Provincial  McGuinty  Liberal  win.

The Ontario electorate  do  bounce  back  and  forth  so  it  is  do-able  and  plausable.

The only item that comes to mind is from which Province will the money come from, if not Provincial, then what Programs, or from what level of taxpayer.

The Devil Does Not Want to Release Any Details.

I wonder why?

cheers :) majere
roger m roeder

Mood: still up
Listening to: girls prostituting themselves on the next top model

Only several strains of cannabis actually cause a little paranoia in some people,  the remainder of paranoia is caused because of fear from the illegality and you just can't relax in case big brother is catching wind ..... got to go eat some brownies now.

cheers :) majere

Mood: pretty good as the in-laws from the rock are visiting
Listening to: not the in-laws...... the news silly.

I guess the Conservatives just are not showing any chances AT A MAJORITY yet as far as their polling goes.  Harper has alluded to the fact today when he said that Canadians are not ready for an election yet and that Ontario voters are willing to forgive the Liberals.

The Conservatives will not go to an election unless their polling shows a majority win.  The Conservatives WILL NOT ACCEPT A MINORITY WIN, therefore no forced election.

The way I think, he is just being polite and that what he really wants to say is that ..... he is pissed at Ontario for not thinking his way with his values with his ideals yet.  As if Ontario ever will eh.

Harper cannot understand how people can look at two evils and stay with the devil they know. 

Ontario sticks with the devil they know.
The west sticks it to Ontario by voting cons at an attempt to balance power.
The East sticks with the Libs due to hand outs .... I lived in Nova Scotio for 7 yrs and New Brunswick for two years with a spouse from the Rock, I have seen it and have heard it.
Quebec likes the Libs also for their free spending of Have provinces money for Quebec.

His polling I bet ya still shows the status quo with the Bloc picking off a couple of Liberal seats.

Still looking at a Liberal minority.

Election timing now mid fall.

The Liberals pulled Kyoto to appease the NDP and prevent a budget government defeat.  Now the Libs can use the budget with the Eastern offshore revenue gains as an election selling point next election and how the Conservatives were willing to defeat the budget and the Eastern revenue program.

A Liberal lie in the making as Harper said today he would pass the Eastern revenue Bill this afternoon, no problem.  Prior to that, the Conservatives were against it one hundred percent, so a Conservative spun lie in the making.

Who will get THEIR spun, lying version out to the Eastern Masses.  My thoughts are the Liberals will easily as they are already on top of the hill with the Conservatives fighting the up hill battle.

The NDP still do count.  They have clung on hoping the environment and the Kyoto Accord would actually galvanize the masses.  Sorry socialist dudes and dudettes, today the environment does not effect me, tomorrow I know it will not affect me, next year I know it will not affect me, and I am prepared to accept the consequences 20 yrs down the road as I, and I am sure everyone has calculated the risk reward scenerio in and for  their environmental life.   Now stay out of mine as you, the NDP have proven that individual soverignty is not one of your Partys' strong suits. 

All parties still suck and lie, except for the Bloc who tell it like it is as Quebecois residents are the most politically informed anyway (you can't lie to the informed)
cheers :) majere
roger m roeder

Mood: on anti-biotics that double the effect of caffiene....hmmm on my second cup
Listening to: canadian newsworld where they just never have an original news item

aaaggghhh how to add a link here..... frustrating.



http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/



Enjoy Canadians, and don't let the government knock down your freedom of expression and your freedom of the press and your freedom of speech  and ..........  don't you just love run-on sentances.

cheers :) rog

Mood: A tradegy performed by black robed thugs against the ignorant they are supposed to protect....how should I feel ?
Listening to: rehashed, rehashed, spun news on the Pope

Thanks to John for his discussions on the matter and for keeping people informed when others cannot.

V: 1. Could you describe what the Canadian Criminal Code
looks like in a courthouse and where they might be located?

JCT: It's usually the Martin's Criminal Code, with navy blue
cover and about 3 inches thick. There are other versions,
Trameare's (?) but the Martin's has the big market share.

V: Is it in a bunch of ring binders where pages are replaced
when new pages published? How high a stack would the papers
create without the binders?

JCT: Yes, there is a binder version, usually in a law
library, which makes photocopying easier than from a 3-inch
book.

V: 2. What is David Frankel's proper title? What is the
corresponding title of US Attorney General and who is he, if
not Frankel?

JCT: Counsel for the Attorney General or Queen. And he holds
one of the top law titles, Q.C., a Queen's Counsel. Defence
lawyers also have Q.C.s so it has nothing to do with
Frankel's working for the Ministry of the Attorney General.

V: 3. What specific sections of the code are you saying that
need to be updated?

JCT: When Section 4 was struck by the Parker #1 Court
(2000), notice how the 2002 and 2003 editions did not
reflect Parker #1. Why not? The government were claiming the
MMAR had fixed the CDSA until the Parker #2 Court [2003]
(Hitzig consolidation) admitted the MMAR had failed to fix
it but then fixed the MMAR to resurrect the CDSA. So the
reason the Government lawyers have not changed the Criminal
Code to reflect Parker #1 yet is that they accept that the
Parker #2 court had the power to resurrect the law.
Remember, these are lawyers working for Canadians who have
chosen to believe this lie. They're all ruined. Once it
comes out, all the chump Crowns who were paid to argue the
lie on the biggest case in Canadian history will be ruined.

So that's their excuse for not reflecting Parker #1. The
Crown didn't know they were wrong until it got fixed so no
one needs to know.

But there is no excuse for not reflecting Krieger S.7
invalidation. Hitzig said nothing about resurrecting the
cultivation prohibition. And the Supreme Court of Canada's
note explaining the facts are a 1-page complete argument.
All we have to do is show it to a lawyer and ask them to
explain what it means. We've seen some silly attempts so
far and I rebutted all the Sadler criticisms, so how come no
one went to beat up him up about it?

V: Is there public record of Frankel admitted the code is
not current in representing the actual laws?

JCT: Yes, http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/frankel.jpg is
just his signature and final comment from the Crown
Memorandum for Leave to appeal the Krieger decision at the
Supreme Court of Canada in Ottawa. I went to Ottawa to get
their Memorandum and published it. If you want to find it,
use Google Groups search function which goes back all the
way to beginning of the medpot campaign. Yahoogroups changed
1500 article campaign, it's useless to find things. But I've
always posted all articles to 7 public USENET newsgroups,
especially can.politics and alt.fan.john-turmel. Google has
archived those public USENET archives. So while Yahoogroups
search function is almost useless, doing less than 2% of the
archive at a time, Google Groups search engine is ideal.
Search for Turmel Frankel Memorandum and "7(1) has been
declared of no force" "by the highest court in Alberta."

Remember, in ancient reported history, what they said in
their memoranda never saw the light. Now, it can be dug up
and posted on the public net and the cat's out of the bag.
Sorry if the only proof is my scanned image of the document.
Of course, I'm sure you can call the Archives of the Supreme
Court of Canada at 613-996-7933 and ask them to fax you a
copy of the Krieger Crown Memorandum for Case #29569.

V: 4. Is there an action that could be taken to make the CCC
properly reflect your vision of the actual laws?

JCT: It's the responsibility of the Ministers of Justice to
produce a Criminal Code that is accurate. If I can't get it
fixed via the courts, you can bet my next beef is to the PM
Paul Martin who seems surprisingly adept at not screwing up
on big issues so far. I don't remember thinking of him as a
moron once since he's been in while it scares me to think
Harper made it out of high school.

V: Is the CCC available on line. If not, do you think that
it should be as an issue of justice?

JCT: Yes it is.

V: 5. If there is intention to misrepresent the laws of
Canada in the CCC, do you think there should be criminal
charges made?

JCT: I think the Justice Minister has an alibi for not
reflecting Parker #1. He thought the Health Minister's MMAR
medical exemption had saved his CDSA but it did not and was
absent. I don't think the Justice Minister in 2002 has an
alibi for not reflecting Krieger which was the far bigger
loss. Both S.7 cultivation (and by implication S.4
possession) declared invalid and he gambled on the new
legislation coming in on May 15 before anyone found out.
Then Turmel showed up on Hill on May 14 and they knew the
game was up. May 16 Frankel signed the Memorandum. Had the
new legislation been introduced to cover the dead zone,
they'd have gotten away with it. Har har har har.

V: Who would they be against and what would the charges be?

JCT: It is mischief to get someone charged when you know
they aren't guilty. It is genocide to have delayed the sick
getting their medicine. Take your pick. I prefer evidence of
corpses over evidence of paperwork. But both work for me.
There's no way the Frankel brothers, Lara Speirs, Croft,
Chris, Vanita, Peter, Rick, and every Crown who read the
truth and got it wrong aren't all guilty, whether they plead
incompetence or not.

V: My biggest question for John Let's start out with a warm
up. How do you interpret these following two paragraphs from
http://www.antiwar.com/bock/pf/p-b051601.html

In a fascinating story that has hardly been reported at all
in the US press, Canada is on the verge of developing a
comprehensive plan to allow and perhaps even to distribute
marijuana to patients whose doctors recommend that they use
it.

JCT: They Parker #2 Court said that the MMAR is not fixed so
the comprehensive plan isn't on the verge of developing, the
government would say that it's already here, to even
distribute marijuana. The only story in this paragraph is
the notion that it's on the verge when it should be here.

V: This came about because last July the Canadian Supreme
Court, hearing a case brought by a medical marijuana
patient, looked beyond the words of the laws to the
scientific evidence and the many anecdotes about unique
relief offered to some patients by cannabis.

JCT: I don't know of the Canadian Supreme Court hearing a
case brought by a medical patient yet. They've only heard
the Clay/Caine/Malmo-Levine recreational arguments.

V: The Canadian high court then ruled that by denying
Canadian patients the ability to try a medicine that just
might relieve some of their pain or suffering with minimal
side effects, the Canadian government was denying them
fundamental rights guaranteed by the Canadian constitution.

JCT: This sounds like the Parker #1 in 2000.

V: It told the government, in effect, that it had a year to
come up with a system to authorize the medicinal use of
cannabis, or it would invalidate all the anti-marijuana-user
laws. Here is the very biggest question I have. I am not
going to copy and paste from
http://www.dutch-passion.nl/news/2003/January/Canada-%20Feds%20Roll%20Out%20Appeal%20on%20Pot%20Ruling.txt

JCT: Now it really sounds like Parker #1.

V: There is a thought repeated from several sources in the
articles that center around the date of January 4, 2003 and
the Judge Phillips decision concerning the 16 year-old boy
and his possession charges. There is the theme that the
government had not met the requirements of Parker decision
of July, 31, 2000.

JCT: Of course, the media focus on the J.P. case that
eventually lost and was not responsible for the ruling that
the law had died on Terry Parker Day. 2001. That's because
the Parker #2 court who ruled on our motion to declare the
law dead on Terry Parker Day didn't put the ruling in
Terry's or the Turmel-Paquette cases who had asked but had
put the response to our motions in J.P. and Hitzig! We asked
for Terry Parker Day and the proof we won was put in the
J.P. and Hitzig cases while ours were dismissed.

V: The key word is Parliament as used in this paragraph from
the above link- "In July of 2000, the Ontario Court of
Appeal struck down the federal law prohibiting the
possession of less than 30 grams of marijuana. In that case,
the court held that the marijuana law violated the rights of
people who use the drug for medicinal purposes. The court
gave Parliament one year to enact changes in the law that
would satisfy constitutional concerns. While the federal
government, waiting until the last minute, responded to that
ruling by issuing Marijuana Medical Access Regulations on
July 31, 2001, those regulations did not address the issue
of recreational use."

JCT: So the law died on Terry Parker Day and the Crown
lawyers were wrong in prosecuting and convicting 100,000
Canadians and are now covering it up. What else?

V: 1. Did the Parker decision affect all possession laws or
just those under 30 grams and what parts of Section 3 of the
CDSA apply to over and under 30 grams? Does over 30 grams
imply trafficking sections of the CDSA apply?

JCT: Parker was charged with possession and cultivation of a
lot more than 30 grams. The 30 grams is just for dealing
with the penalties which the media introduced as a pretext
that it's only for under 30 grams. Check out the Parker
decision. Nowhere does it say 30 grams. It's just part of
the media spin to lessen the impact.

V: 2. Let us say that Health Canada adopted a very sensible
MMAR, had the doctor's informed with facts on MMJ and asked
there support, and developed a wonderful supply for everyone
with doctor's approval, and even set out a research program.
Let us say they had the utopian plan.

JCT: Then I would have continued my fight as a healthy
person to argue that it's a violation of my constitutional
right to life to deny me its use for medical preventative
reasons. My healthy-guy reasons are a whole lot better than
the weak-sister recreational Clay/Caine/Malmo-Levine cases.
I playing the the Charter "right to life" card while they only
played the Charter "right to recreate" card.

V: How is it that Health Canada could do this without
Parliament amending the CDSA? Wouldn't they have to have
proper authorization in order not to violate the CDSA? Do
the previous questions have meaning to anything relevant to
your dead-law beliefs or to the Hitzig decision?

JCT: I don't disagree with the Parker #2 Doherty court that
the Government could fix the problem without resorting to
Parliament. Heck, if they'd dropped marijuana from Schedule
2, would I have complained Parliament had to do it? No.

But once the law had been repealed, remember how I announced
a strategy change? No more arguing it's bad, only arguing
it's been killed. It's dead. Terry will vouch how many times
he wanted to get into how evil prohibition is for epileptics
and I'd say "your cards already won the hand, now we focus
on collecting the pot." The game changed from winning the
pot to collecting it. To having them admit we won. Because
when Krieger won, it meant nothing because no one knew and
the Crown didn't tell.

It's about time the government lawyers who do evil get
nailed. Sure, I'd expect defence lawyers to resort to sleaze
to win for their clients but I don't expect government
lawyers to resort to sleaze to win against their clients.
Us. The Canadian people. Heck, just going down in internet
posterity as corrupt officials who caused needless deaths
should be all the real punishment necessary. We know they
kept medicine from the sick and dying and so does history.
Har har har har. Har har har har.

EP: Your ??? questions might be valid if they were based on
a correct premise or interpretation or reading of the cases
involved. Please refrain from accepting the reports of Court
cases that you read in the press. READ THE JUDGMENTS 
They are usually slanted  by the newspapers policy, liberal
or conservative.  In any event
While the Phillips case involved a youth found in possession
of less than 30 grams, the Parker case, the controlling case
declared clearly and specifically that the prohibition
against possession of marihuana CDSA s. 4 is
unconstitutional and of no force and effect
That means a gram, a ton  a lb or an ounce could not become
the object of a charge alleging possession of the substance
marihuana as set forth in the CDSA schedules.  While the
obiter dicta speaks to medical requirements of Mr. Parker,
neither the concluding judgment or Order of the Court of
appeal stipulates  a showing of medical necessity is
required to be established.
 
Later in the Alberta case of Krieger, Leave to appeal to
Supreme Court of Canada denied. The dicta and the Order
states that if the cultivation and possession is established
to be for medical reasons there can be no conviction, and
held that the law against cultivation producing marihuana
was unconstitutional.

JCT: That's not what the Costigan, Wittman, LoVecchio
judgment says. Sure, it was struck by a sick guy for sick
reasons but nowhere do they way that it's only struck down
for only sick guys. Can you imagine the nightmares?

The law is either struck down or it stays up with
exemptions. It's not struck down for the sick and not struck
down for the healthy. Of course, this is what Judge Doherty
argued. That the cops should bust everybody and the courts
would get out their stethoscopes and determine who were sick
enough to be let off and who were not.

And besides, even if Pearson's "only for the sick" change by
Krieger is all we get, where in the Criminal Code does it
show that S.7 has been changed by Krieger to exempt the sick
from cultivation busts. I checked, The latest precedent
cited for S.7 in Martin's is a 1993 case. Last I heard, they
were still busting the sick (who can't meet the onerous
conditions for exemption) for cultivation. Sure, they call
do a Krieger constitutional challenge too. Anyway, the
Supreme Court didn't say anything about the sick in their
background history and they would have had it really been
true. S.7 is down for everyone and Pearson's got to be
corrected again.

So whether only for the sick or for everyone, Frankel has
caused the Criminal Code not to reflect the truth. If Crown
Attorneys take some kind of oath, we have to be able to get
him here too.
Thanks John C. Turmel
roger m roeder

Mood: peeved as all they are doing is talking about the Pope
Listening to: nothing but the Pope on the news....aaaaagggh.

With the latest news leaking from the Gomery Inquiry as of Friday yesterday, there will still be a Liberal minority elected.

The Bloc will pretty well sweep Quebec as predicted by all.

The NDP will only pick up a few more votes from the leftist Liberals.  Not enough to make a differance.

The Conservative Party is still considered scary and have done nothing to show otherwise.  Will lose some seats in the East due to the apparent non-apporval of the budget which allows greater resource income.

The Liberals while losing seats in Quebec will pick up several in the East.

A very close Liberal minority by just one to four seats.

The Conservatives, I imagine will not want to "win" a minority election.  Why?
They will be forced to be center-ist in their Throne Speech, centerist in their budget, centerist in their policies that they wish to impliment.

Considering that they are the party that is from the "right" and all other parties are "left", they will have to make the most "gives" in their "right wing" policies that have got them elected in the first place.  With this in mind they run the risk of losing the right wing electoral voters as they become dissallusioned with just another politcal party that lied to them.

A Conservative minority being forced to the centre will cause disention as even Randy White is quitting.  Are there any other Randy Whites in the Party that will come forefront and shoot the Party in the foot?  Harper couldn't control him, how can he control other "Whites" and their scary right wing views.  This can still be used by the Liberals and of course they will.

The Liberals last budget shows a very wide good for everyone budget that does nothing in reality.  The Liberals know they can spin this as "less scary" than what the Consevatives might impliment ....... read Eastern Provinces again which is where the Liberals will HAVE TO MAKE UP SEATS.

The Liberals have left the time bomb of the Frankel/Krieger scandal that can be guarenteed to go off with the a Conservative minortiy forcing the Conservatives use of the "Not Withstanding Clause" which would reinforce the "scarieness" of the Conservative Party for the following election.  A Conservatives worst nightmare.

Yes I keep mentioning this Judicial/Political scandal called the Frankel/Krieger scandel as they as in all political parties have been notified through various emails from various people to ALL Members of Parliament.

All of the present time bombs and scandels force the Parties to think beyond just the next election, something that is foriegn to them as all politicians can do is think about just getting elected "this" election, thus securing their pension and their pay cheque.  How does one think beyond that to the following election after that?  Well, they are now being forced to due to their own doing, or shall I say due to their lack of inaction on scandels as in "nip it in the bud" versus the "ignore it and it will blow over in 2 weeks as the electorate has short memories".

A Fiberal minority.

Election time early summer or early fall.

Oh yea, the NDP still do not count.  They acutally have the likes of Allison Myrden in their Party who was an electoral candidate last election.  Why mention her?  She cannont understand basic law, refuses to read basic english unless it backs up her ignorance, and quotes from uninformed sources about information that is so out of date that she lacks all credibility.  Thats the NDP, ....No due Diligence Preferred.  I honestly thought that the NDP would stick up for individual soverignty as in bringing forth the Frankel scandal and to point out all those that have been harmed.........ooooopss I was wrong and they proved it.

cheers :) majere
roger m roeder