Canada's Federal Income Tax is unconstitutional- - - FROM nenki's page ( conspiration.cc)//Vote on freedom of expression marks the end of Universal Human Rights from ICKE's page.

lundi 14 avril 2008 12 h 13
De:
Afficher les détails du contact
À:
bellringer@fourwinds10.com, sott@signs-of-the-times.org, medias@amecq.ca, help@garth.ca, nenki@conspiration.cc, alternatives@alternatives.ca, lapagenoire@propagande.org, jacqueline_czernin@cbc.ca, ilvayavoirdusport@telequebec.tv, coulissesdupouvoir@radio-canada.ca, francois.paradis@tva.ca... suite
..... extracted:Text of Murray Gauvreau (...) Isn't a JURISDIC FICTICIOUS PERSON, a SOCIAL REASON or a COMMERCIAL ENTITY created by Government.Jean-Paul Massie:Living Man made of blood flesh and bones and with a Soul created by Almighty God that is not to sell.+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Canada Bank - Money Created by Thin AirCanada's Federal Income Tax is unconstitutional “Once a nation parts with the control of its currency and credit, it matters not who makes the nations laws. Usury, once in control, will wreck any nation. Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most sacred responsibility, all talk of sovereignty of parliament and of democracy is idle and futile.”Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King, talking about the BANK OF CANADA in1935Here is the beginning of the physical proof that CANADA BANK is a total private corporation. See the attached file "Bell Local Directory - Business pages - page 29, Canada Bank.jpg. If Central Bank is a public institution own by federal government, it MUST BE NOT LISTED IN BUSINES PAGES but ONLY in the government blue pages of the Bell Canada directory.51% second class non voting actions ( B ) are detains by Minister of Finance of the Government of Canada !49% first class actions ( A ) are detains by the CANADA BANK cartel !Minister of Finance has only a consultative right on the council board of CANADA BANK !GOVERNMENT OF CANADA HAS NO WORD TO SAY ABOUT CANADA BANK GOVERNOR MONEY POLICIES !* CANADA BANK INC. MAKES ITS PRIVATE OWNERS (THE INTERNATIONAL BANKERS CARTELS) WHEALTYER BY COLLECTING THE INCOME TAX ON THE LABOUR OF CANADIAN PEOPLE !
* TO CREATE INFLATION OR DEFLATION, CANADA BANK INC. HAVE ALWAYS PLAYED WITH THE VALUE OF OUR CURRENCY NOT BASED ON GOLD BUT THIN AIR !
* FOR DECADES, THIS MONOPOLY GAME HAS CAUSE TREMENDOUS PAIN AND SUFFERING TO THE PEOPLE OF CANADA !
* IT IS TOTALLY FALSE TO SAY THAT, BY THE END OF WORLD WAR ONE IN 1918, PRICES OF CANADIAN GOODS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY 50%, 75%, 100%, 500% OR 1000% !
* CANADA BANK INK. PRINTED 45 BILLIONS DOLLARS, NOT ENOUGH TO REIMBURSE THE PRINCIPAL THAT IS 600 BILLIONS DOLLARS DEBT.
* WITH THE AMOUNT OF MONEY STILL IN COMPUTERS, THERE IS 1000 BILLIONS DOLLARS IN CANADA.
* IT IS TOTALLY FALSE TO SAY THAT CANADIAN PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO REIMBURSE A 600 BILLIONS DOLLARS DEBT THAT DOES NOT EXIST !
* IT'S A FRAUD COMMITTED ON CANADIAN PEOPLE !
* GIVE BACK THE POWER TO THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT TO PRINT A PERMANENT STABLE MONEY !
* IT IS HIS ABSOLUTE RIGHT GARANTEED BY CONSTITUTION OF 1867 !The only way to achieve this goal, it is by a personal awareness of the situation and by an organised national civil pressure on the ELECTED representatives. Federal government must take control of the currency and credit, and print the Canadian money as it was before the CANADA BANK act was adopted in 1934.*
CONSTITUTION OF 1867 GIVES ONLY TO PROVINCES THE RIGHT TO ESTABLISH INCOME TAX LAWS !
*
FEDERAL INCOME TAX ON MEN AND WOMEN LABOUR IS TOTALLY ILLEGAL !Whit the retreat of Province of Quebec of the Canadian Federation in 1968, Quebec is no longer a Canadian province but a legal State that is not suppose to be submit to Canadian laws.CANADIAN INCOME TAX IS A FRAUD COMMITTED ON THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF QUEBEC !People of the State of Quebec must quickly recognise this fact and ask politely to Canada to get out of Quebec !Canada's Federal Income Tax is unconstitutional.The constitution gives the Federal Government the right to issue its own currency..............................................................................................................Here are excerpts from a paper that was delivered in October, 1991, by Mr. Murray Gauvreau, of Alberta, at a seminar of the Canadian League of Rights, in Calgary, which was published in the July, 1992 issue of "The Canadian Intelligence Service" (55 - 8th Ave. S.E., High River , Alberta T1V 1E8):by Murray Gauvreau I would like to talk with you today about money, interest, debt, and taxation. Thank you for your interest and for coming to hear me speak. I'm sure that all of you are interested in Imcome Tax, and the GST. I will no doubt give you some enlightening facts. In order to fully understand the problem that we face today in Canada, we will briefly discuss some important aspects of our history.In addition, I will try to give you an understanding of how the many taxes we now pay have come about. I will also propose some solutions to our dilemma. But please keep this in mind: our problem is perceived to be vast and complex, and it is intended by those in power that you feel exactly that way, so that you will feel helpless to do anything about it. But after today you will know for certain that our problem is not complex at all, and neither is its solution.1867 - the B.N.A. ActAs a result of having taken advantage of the many career advancement courses offered by the life insurance industry, I became aware that the banks have exclusive right to issue currency in Canada, as determined by the Federal Bank Act. But I didn't see them printing money, so I decided to find out exactly how they do issue currency. My search led me back into the early history of our nation, and into the history of our Province...So let's go back a ways, to the year 1867, and look into the pages of the Canadian Constitution, commonly known as the British North America (B.N.A.) Act. Therein lies the real solution to the ailments, both social and economic, that our country suffers from today. It is the same document today that it was when it was written so long ago.The B.N.A. Act was written in order to establish the legal basis for this country. All laws enacted in Canada, whether by municipal, provincial, or federal government, must comply with the terms of the B.N.A. Act. If they do not, they are then unconstitutional, or in legal terms "ultra vires," and can be disallowed as law. The document belongs to the people of Canada, and not to the parliamentarians or the courts, or to the Prime Minister and the Premiers... It belongs to the people.The Canadian Constitution was not changed or altered when it was brought home by Mr. Trudeau, as some suggest. However, there was a very important addition made to it at that time. That addition was the Canadian Bill of Human Rights. Today the Canadian Constitution, as we know it, is comprised of the original B.N.A. Act, and the Human Rights Act, together...Direct taxation belongs to provincesThere are two specific sections of the B.N.A. Act that deal with the delegation of authority between the Federal and Provincial Governments. Sections 91 and 92 deal with authority for various types of taxation, who has authority to levy which taxes, and various other areas of jurisdiction.The Act is very specific in its direction. The right to tax income, known as "direct" tax, was delegated to the provinces; and it was clearly indicated that any monies so raised must be raised provincially, and used for provincial purposes. The Federal Government was denied the right to levy income tax.But the Supreme Court of Canada goes further. It states that no level or government is allowed to transfer its authority to another level of government, and if transfer were attempted by one level, it could not legally be accepted by another.On October 3, 1950, the Supreme Court of Canada handed down a decision in the case involving the Lord Nelson Hotel of Halifax, Nova Scotia, against the Attorneys-General of Nova Scotia and Canada. The case involved the transfer of powers from the Provincial to the Federal Government, and was directly related to the income Tax Act. In a seven-judge unanimous decision, the highest court in our land ruled that power transfers cannot legally take place. The Federal Government was given until 1962 to remove itself from all such power-transfer agreements, including the Income tax business, and scrap the Income Tax Act...Clearly, the Federal Government has no constitutional right to engage in the Income Tax business, or any other type of direct taxation, whether on behalf of itself or on behalf of the provinces. Therefore, the Income Tax Act is, in itself, unconstitutional, and need not to be obeyed...The Federal Government can create its own currencyIt is interesting to note that the same sections of the B.N.A. Act that disallow the Federal Government the right to collect income tax, did however provide for a means whereby the Federal Government could raise capital. Sectons 91 (14, 15,16, 28, 29, and 20) give the Federal Government the authority, and the responsibility, for the control and issue of our currency, based upon the resources and wealth of the nation. They were given an unlimited supply of debt-free money with which to operate the contry. All they had to do was print it. And they did just that for the first 46 years of our country.Government gives banks credit monopolyThen, some 46 years after Confederation, in 1913, our parliamentarians were poorly advised in committing a grave injustice to future generations of Canadians by passing an amendment to the B.N.A. Act (without referendum!) commonly known as the Bank Act. By this act, the Federal Government gave to the banking system the sole right to create the financial credit (in reality, the "money") of our nation. And for the last 79 years, the private banking system has been exercising this monopolistic prerogative of creating and controlling the Canadian people's financial credit.Well, banks don't work for free... they charge "interest." They even charge interest to the Government. And interest can never be repaid; it just keeps adding up, and up, and up, until today our national debt alone is approaching $600 billion.Shipwrecked on an island(Editor's note: At this point of his speech, Mr. Gauvreau explains in detail the same story related by Louis Even in "The Money Myth Exploded," formerly called "Salvation Islan":)Let's assume that those of us here this afternoon are shipwreck survivors, and that we are stranded on a deserted island. Our only means of survival are to help each other by each doing those things that are necessary for the betterment of our new community, until we can be rescued. One of us becomes a farmer, one a fisherman, one a carpenter, and so on.Each of us has his own role to play for the survival of the community. No one has any money, and at least for the time being, there is no need for money, All are contributing equally, and all are on the same economic level. We are satisfactorily exchanging our goods and services by barter. But gradually, as the community evolves, it becomes apparent that money will be necessary. Bob already has a house, and the carpenter doesn't need another hundred pounds of fish. But we do need to associate, cooperate, and continue to contribute to the community. There needs to be an acceptable and equitable means of exchanging our goods and services...Then one day, as the community is sitting on the beach, talking about their problem, we notice another raft approaching the island. All are happy to see a new face, and we greet the new arrival warmly. As we continue to talk, someone in the community tells the vew arrival about our dilemma, about how we started the community, developed it, built it through cooperation, and advanced to the point where we now need some form of exchange to help make the community grow and flourish. The new arrival's eyes light up. "I have the answer to your problem," says the new arrival. "I'm a banker. I'll set to work right now to print you some money."The next morning, the whole community meets in front of the banker's new house. As the banker distributes the money, he reminds us that the money belong to him, and that we do not "own" it, but that we can only "borrow" it, and that we must pay a small fee for the privilege of borriwing it. We can pay that at the end of the year. And he requests that each person sign the agreement to pay 5%, which is certainly not excessive interest.The debt cannot be paid backThe first year goes by. The community functions and prospers during the year; then at the end of the year we return to the banker, to pay him back what we had borrowed. But we find, to our dismay, that we cannot repay the loan, because we do not have enough money. We find that we now owe all that we had borrowed, plus 5%, which is the interest. The $1,000 that we had borrowed has now become $1,050. Since there is obviously no way to pay back the $50, which is the interest, the banker suggests that we leave the loan on the books as a $1,000, leaving a lesser amount of $950 for each of us to operate on for the next year. Seeing no other real answer, the community agrees to the new terms, and attempts to operate with less money for another year.At the end of the second year, the community faces a similar, but greater, problem. In buying down the loan, we find that our operating capital has now been cut by 10%, to $900. We realize that if the plan is allowed to continue, the banker will own the island, in its entirety, having contributed nothing but the paper and ink (bookkeeping) that was used to monetize the community's real credit in the first place. Some of the islanders protest.But the banker has now had a couple of years to prepare for this day. To counter the objection that is inevitable, he has taken evasive steps. He has used the time to develop credibility in the community to educate us as to how valuable his service is, and what a fine contribution he has made to the community. He established colleges and universities majoring in economics, and teaches our children and our educators all about his money system. He ensures that few, if any, in the community are aware that there is another way; and he encourages the community to discount as ridiculous any suggestion that there could be a better way to finance a community...The solution: Social CreditThen one day, one of the islanders decides to take a walk along the beach and deliberate upon what has happened to the community. As he strolls along, head down, thinking, he notices what appears to be the corner of a book sticking out from the sand. He kneels, and picks up the book and brushes it off. The title, though tarnished from time, wind, and tide, is still readable - "The Meaning of Social Credit." The islanders had never heard of this before, but he has not had a book to read for a long time, so he sits down on the beach to read it. A nd as he reads, he becomes more and more interested and excited. He realizes that this book holds the real answers to his island's financial problem. The book describes how a community can function very well by simply creating a Balance Sheet, a system of debits and credits...He runs back to relate the exiting news of his discovery to the rest of the community. As he gathers the islanders to discuss his find, the banker watches with concern. Is his jug up? Has he been found out? Is the community finally ready to take back its property, and reconstruct it, and once again have prosperity and cooperation?Friends, only you can answer these questions, because the island I talk about is your country, and the community I refer to is all of us.The story paints a rather dismal picture of the banking system in our country. Please understand, the average bank manager, teller or loans officer, has absolutely no knowledge of what you have just learned. They are merely pawns in a much larger game. But rest assured, those in the upper levels of management in the finance industry are absolutely certain of what they are doing, and how it affects the citizens of this country... Any system that enslaves and controls a population in the way that our finance system does, cannot possibly be from the Lord. So there is only one other place it could come from...Banks do not lend out depositors' moneyDoes anybody here know where the banks get the money that they lend out? Actually, most people assume that they lend out depositors' money. But the Bank Act specifies that the bank must retain the depositor's money on account, and must pay him interest on it.So, where else might the bank get the money?The Bank Act also specifies that the bank may create, out of nothing, new credit ("money") through loans, but that it must have a relationship to the deposits. Originally, the banks were allowed to lend out six times their deposits, but today banks are allowed to issue new credit up to 26 times their deposits. That means that if I deposit my $1,000 in a Canadian bank, then that bank can issue loans to the tune of $26,000... Go to the bank, get a loan, and ask for the loan proceeds in cash. No matter the size of the loan, you cannot get it in cash - it must be deposited to your account, and cheques written in order to access the money. No tangible money is ever created; only debits and credits (figures) are created...Today in Canada, the only source of money, whether private, corporate, or governmental need, is a loan from a bank. But you can never borrow your way out of debt. You can only borrow your way into bankruptcy, at which time you turn your back on your assets and your hard work, and give up possession of it to those to whom you owe money, but who gave absolutely no vested interest in your property...1917: the Federal Income TaxNow that we understand that the national debt can never be fully repaid using the current system of finance, the question arises: How, then, does it get paid? In 1917, after finding out that the debt was beginning to build, the Federal Government usurped the powers of the provincial governments and, under the guise of the War Debt, instituted the War Debt Income Tax Act. The Act was unconstitutional then, and it is still unconstitutional today. When it was enacted, it was on a voluntary basis, at a rate of 10%, and applied only to those earning $10,000 or more per year. In 1917, the average yearly salary was about $250.The Income Tax Act could have more appropriately been named the Bank Interest Debt Income Tax Act; but then, people would have fought to the death to keep it out of effect. Since that time, the Federal Government has seen fit to increase the tax rate as high as 65% on high-income individuals, and has also seen fit to remove the lower limits to the point that, as you know, everyone is required to pay...And now we have had the GST, which in my opinion is equaly as unconstitutional, rammed down our throats by a group of MPs that brashly and boldly declare that they are smarter than we are, and they know best...Facing up to realityOur Federal Government has gone so far away from the Constitution, in nearly every area of jurisdiction, that it now conspires to change it altogether. But that is not the solution. Getting back to the way it was written is the solution...Each one of us selects his mode and method of doing battles with oppressive government. Some of us do it by speaking out... some of us join non-party political groups, some of us pray, and most of us do nothing. We have a condition called the "ostrich syndrome." If we ignore it and don't look at it, it might go away! But remember this: if your head is in the sand, your butt is an open target!The Hart System: tax avoidance Federal Income Tax is illegalI handle my fight personally using a system called the Hart System of Effective Tax Avoidance. Gerry Hart passed avay recently in Winnipeg, but not before becoming Canada's undisputed champion No. 1 tax fighter. Mr. Hart for many years opted to take an aggressive and active position against oppressive government, and he has not paid income tax in nearly 50 years. During that time, he has been imposed upon, charged, harassed, his privacy invaded, and his person subjected to illegal search. But he has never given an inch. He has been to the Manitoba Court of Appeal 22 times, but has never lost.In 1950 Gerry Hart received a copy of a Vancouver newspaper article which reported on a recent ruling made by the Supreme Court of Canada. He then requested a copy of the ruling itself, from the Supreme Court Chancery in Ottawa. He also requested a copy of the B.N.A. Act, because the ruling quoted various sections of that document. He found, just as the newspaper had reported, that Section 91 and 92 of the B.N.A. Act do not allow for the Federal Government to be in the Income Tax business.The two documents - the Supreme Court ruling and the B.N.A. Act - have been the basis of his battle, and the only two cocuments he has needed. He has never had the benefit of legal counsel, and has chosen to appear in court by himself. His only evidence has been those two documents. Charges against him have been thrown out of court 22 times. The last time, some twelve or so years ago, Revenue Canada was told that if it ever brought Gerry Hart back into court, that Revenue Canada itself would be charged with contempt of court.Gerry Hart has never been convicted under the Income Tax Act. As he says, "Income Tax is illegal. Therefore the collection of it is also illegal. Since Revenue Canada has no legal method of collecting income tax, they must resort to illegal means." Those illegal means include harassment, intimidation, illegal search, illegal seizure, violation of privacy, extortion, coercion, and complete ignorance and contempt for the human rights of Canadian citizens...We have various books and booklets available to help to educate on how to prepare to stop paying these illegal taxes. If our "Tax Kit" can help you to avoid several thousands of dollars of tax, it is certainly worth its small investment. Be sure to protect yourself from Revenue Canada before you get involved in this tax fight. Read the books, and find out how...If you still have questions after you have read the books, then call me. I'll try to help you. I have not paid income tax since 1978, and I have used Gerry Hart's System of Effective Tax Avoidance. I know it works; I'm living proof.Ladies and Gentlemen: I've talked for a long time. But I cannot overstress the lateness of the hour. We all know what needs to be done, so let's get busy and get to it!Murray Gauvreau.........................................................................Until State of Quebec recognise his sovereignty, this email still in conformity with the Supreme Court of Canada judgement CSC 14.27704 dated on 2002/02/21 http://www.industriequebec.ca/portal/fr/Content.php?id=300Isn't a JURISDIC FICTICIOUS PERSON, a SOCIAL REASON or a COMMERCIAL ENTITY created by Government. Jean-Paul Massie :Living Man made of blood flesh and bones and with a Soul created by Almighty God that is not to sell. from:http://www.conspiration.cc/bank/arrestation_guylaine_lanctot.html..........................................................................................................

“Once a nation parts with the control of its currency and credit, it matters not who makes the nations laws. Usury, once in control, will wreck any nation. Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most sacred responsibility, all talk of sovereignty of parliament and of democracy is idle and futile.”

Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King, talking about the BANK OF CANADA in1935

Here is the beginning of the physical proof that CANADA BANK is a total private corporation. See the attached file "Bell Local Directory - Business pages - page 29, Canada Bank.jpg. If Central Bank is a public institution own by federal government, it MUST BE NOT LISTED IN BUSINES PAGES but ONLY in the government blue pages of the Bell Canada directory.

51% second class non voting actions ( B ) are detains by Minister of Finance of the Government of Canada !

49% first class actions ( A ) are detains by the CANADA BANK cartel !

Minister of Finance has only a consultative right on the council board of CANADA BANK !

GOVERNMENT OF CANADA HAS NO WORD TO SAY ABOUT CANADA BANK GOVERNOR MONEY POLICIES !

* CANADA BANK INC. MAKES ITS PRIVATE OWNERS (THE INTERNATIONAL BANKERS CARTELS) WHEALTYER BY COLLECTING THE INCOME TAX ON THE LABOUR OF CANADIAN PEOPLE !

* TO CREATE INFLATION OR DEFLATION, CANADA BANK INC. HAVE ALWAYS PLAYED WITH THE VALUE OF OUR CURRENCY NOT BASED ON GOLD BUT THIN AIR !

* FOR DECADES, THIS MONOPOLY GAME HAS CAUSE TREMENDOUS PAIN AND SUFFERING TO THE PEOPLE OF CANADA !

* IT IS TOTALLY FALSE TO SAY THAT, BY THE END OF WORLD WAR ONE IN 1918, PRICES OF CANADIAN GOODS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY 50%, 75%, 100%, 500% OR 1000% !

* CANADA BANK INK. PRINTED 45 BILLIONS DOLLARS, NOT ENOUGH TO REIMBURSE THE PRINCIPAL THAT IS 600 BILLIONS DOLLARS DEBT.

* WITH THE AMOUNT OF MONEY STILL IN COMPUTERS, THERE IS 1000 BILLIONS DOLLARS IN CANADA.

* IT IS TOTALLY FALSE TO SAY THAT CANADIAN PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO REIMBURSE A 600 BILLIONS DOLLARS DEBT THAT DOES NOT EXIST !

* IT'S A FRAUD COMMITTED ON CANADIAN PEOPLE !

* GIVE BACK THE POWER TO THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT TO PRINT A PERMANENT STABLE MONEY !

* IT IS HIS ABSOLUTE RIGHT GARANTEED BY CONSTITUTION OF 1867 !

The only way to achieve this goal, it is by a personal awareness of the situation and by an organised national civil pressure on the ELECTED representatives. Federal government must take control of the currency and credit, and print the Canadian money as it was before the CANADA BANK act was adopted in 1934.
*
CONSTITUTION OF 1867 GIVES ONLY TO PROVINCES THE RIGHT TO ESTABLISH INCOME TAX LAWS !
*
FEDERAL INCOME TAX ON MEN AND WOMEN LABOUR IS TOTALLY ILLEGAL !

Whit the retreat of Province of Quebec of the Canadian Federation in 1968, Quebec is no longer a Canadian province but a legal State that is not suppose to be submit to Canadian laws.

CANADIAN INCOME TAX IS A FRAUD COMMITTED ON THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF QUEBEC !

People of the State of Quebec must quickly recognise this fact and ask politely to Canada to get out of Quebec !

Canada's Federal Income Tax is unconstitutional.

The constitution gives the Federal Government the right to issue its own currency.
.............................................................................................................

Here are excerpts from a paper that was delivered in October, 1991, by Mr. Murray Gauvreau, of Alberta, at a seminar of the Canadian League of Rights, in Calgary, which was published in the July, 1992 issue of "The Canadian Intelligence Service" (55 - 8th Ave. S.E., High River , Alberta T1V 1E8):

by Murray Gauvreau

I would like to talk with you today about money, interest, debt, and taxation. Thank you for your interest and for coming to hear me speak. I'm sure that all of you are interested in Imcome Tax, and the GST. I will no doubt give you some enlightening facts. In order to fully understand the problem that we face today in Canada, we will briefly discuss some important aspects of our history.

In addition, I will try to give you an understanding of how the many taxes we now pay have come about. I will also propose some solutions to our dilemma. But please keep this in mind: our problem is perceived to be vast and complex, and it is intended by those in power that you feel exactly that way, so that you will feel helpless to do anything about it. But after today you will know for certain that our problem is not complex at all, and neither is its solution.
1867 - the B.N.A. Act

As a result of having taken advantage of the many career advancement courses offered by the life insurance industry, I became aware that the banks have exclusive right to issue currency in Canada, as determined by the Federal Bank Act. But I didn't see them printing money, so I decided to find out exactly how they do issue currency. My search led me back into the early history of our nation, and into the history of our Province...

So let's go back a ways, to the year 1867, and look into the pages of the Canadian Constitution, commonly known as the British North America (B.N.A.) Act. Therein lies the real solution to the ailments, both social and economic, that our country suffers from today. It is the same document today that it was when it was written so long ago.

The B.N.A. Act was written in order to establish the legal basis for this country. All laws enacted in Canada, whether by municipal, provincial, or federal government, must comply with the terms of the B.N.A. Act. If they do not, they are then unconstitutional, or in legal terms "ultra vires," and can be disallowed as law. The document belongs to the people of Canada, and not to the parliamentarians or the courts, or to the Prime Minister and the Premiers... It belongs to the people.

The Canadian Constitution was not changed or altered when it was brought home by Mr. Trudeau, as some suggest. However, there was a very important addition made to it at that time. That addition was the Canadian Bill of Human Rights. Today the Canadian Constitution, as we know it, is comprised of the original B.N.A. Act, and the Human Rights Act, together...

Direct taxation belongs to provinces

There are two specific sections of the B.N.A. Act that deal with the delegation of authority between the Federal and Provincial Governments. Sections 91 and 92 deal with authority for various types of taxation, who has authority to levy which taxes, and various other areas of jurisdiction.

The Act is very specific in its direction. The right to tax income, known as "direct" tax, was delegated to the provinces; and it was clearly indicated that any monies so raised must be raised provincially, and used for provincial purposes. The Federal Government was denied the right to levy income tax.

But the Supreme Court of Canada goes further. It states that no level or government is allowed to transfer its authority to another level of government, and if transfer were attempted by one level, it could not legally be accepted by another.

On October 3, 1950, the Supreme Court of Canada handed down a decision in the case involving the Lord Nelson Hotel of Halifax, Nova Scotia, against the Attorneys-General of Nova Scotia and Canada. The case involved the transfer of powers from the Provincial to the Federal Government, and was directly related to the income Tax Act. In a seven-judge unanimous decision, the highest court in our land ruled that power transfers cannot legally take place. The Federal Government was given until 1962 to remove itself from all such power-transfer agreements, including the Income tax business, and scrap the Income Tax Act...

Clearly, the Federal Government has no constitutional right to engage in the Income Tax business, or any other type of direct taxation, whether on behalf of itself or on behalf of the provinces. Therefore, the Income Tax Act is, in itself, unconstitutional, and need not to be obeyed...

The Federal Government can create its own currencyIt is interesting to note that the same sections of the B.N.A. Act that disallow the Federal Government the right to collect income tax, did however provide for a means whereby the Federal Government could raise

capital. Sectons 91 (14, 15,16, 28, 29, and 20) give the Federal Government the authority, and the responsibility, for the control and issue of our currency, based upon the resources and wealth of the nation. They were given an unlimited supply of debt-free money with which to operate the contry. All they had to do was print it. And they did just that for the first 46 years of our country.

Government gives banks credit monopoly Then, some 46 years after Confederation, in 1913, our parliamentarians were poorly advised in committing a grave injustice to future generations of Canadians by passing an amendment to the B.N.A. Act (without referendum!) commonly known as the Bank Act. By this act, the Federal Government gave to the banking system the sole right to create the financial credit (in reality, the "money") of our nation. And for the last 79 years, the private banking system has been exercising this monopolistic prerogative of creating and controlling the Canadian people's financial credit.

Well, banks don't work for free... they charge "interest." They even charge interest to the Government. And interest can never be repaid; it just keeps adding up, and up, and up, until today our national debt alone is approaching $600 billion.

Shipwrecked on an island (Editor's note: At this point of his speech, Mr. Gauvreau explains in detail the same story related by Louis Even in "The Money Myth Exploded," formerly called "Salvation Islan":)

 Let's assume that those of us here this afternoon are shipwreck survivors, and that we are stranded on a deserted island. Our only means of survival are to help each other by each doing those things that are necessary for the betterment of our new community, until we can be rescued. One of us becomes a farmer, one a fisherman, one a carpenter, and so on.

Each of us has his own role to play for the survival of the community. No one has any money, and at least for the time being, there is no need for money, All are contributing equally, and all are on the same economic level. We are satisfactorily exchanging our goods and services by barter. But gradually, as the community evolves, it becomes apparent that money will be necessary. Bob already has a house, and the carpenter doesn't need another hundred pounds of fish. But we do need to associate, cooperate, and continue to contribute to the community. There needs to be an acceptable and equitable means of exchanging our goods and services...

Then one day, as the community is sitting on the beach, talking about their problem, we notice another raft approaching the island. All are happy to see a new face, and we greet the new arrival warmly. As we continue to talk, someone in the community tells the vew arrival about our dilemma, about how we started the community, developed it, built it through cooperation, and advanced to the point where we now need some form of exchange to help make the community grow and flourish. The new arrival's eyes light up. "I have the answer to your problem," says the new arrival. "I'm a banker. I'll set to work right now to print you some money."

The next morning, the whole community meets in front of the banker's new house. As the banker distributes the money, he reminds us that the money belong to him, and that we do not "own" it, but that we can only "borrow" it, and that we must pay a small fee for the privilege of borriwing it. We can pay that at the end of the year. And he requests that each person sign the agreement to pay 5%, which is certainly not excessive interest.

The debt cannot be paid back The first year goes by. The community functions and prospers during the year; then at the end of the year we return to the banker, to pay him back what we had borrowed. But we find, to our dismay, that we cannot repay the loan, because we do not have enough money. We find that we now owe all that we had borrowed, plus 5%, which is the interest. The $1,000 that we had borrowed has now become $1,050. Since there is obviously no way to pay back the $50, which is the interest, the banker suggests that we leave the loan on the books as a $1,000, leaving a lesser amount of $950 for each of us to operate on for the next year. Seeing no other real answer, the community agrees to the new terms, and attempts to operate with less money for another year.

At the end of the second year, the community faces a similar, but greater, problem. In buying down the loan, we find that our operating capital has now been cut by 10%, to $900. We realize that if the plan is allowed to continue, the banker will own the island, in its entirety, having contributed nothing but the paper and ink (bookkeeping) that was used to monetize the community's real credit in the first place. Some of the islanders protest.

But the banker has now had a couple of years to prepare for this day. To counter the objection that is inevitable, he has taken evasive steps. He has used the time to develop credibility in the community to educate us as to how valuable his service is, and what a fine contribution he has made to the community. He established colleges and universities majoring in economics, and teaches our children and our educators all about his money system. He ensures that few, if any, in the community are aware that there is another way; and he encourages the community to discount as ridiculous any suggestion that there could be a better way to finance a community...

The solution: Social Credit Then one day, one of the islanders decides to take a walk along the beach and deliberate upon what has happened to the community. As he strolls along, head down, thinking, he notices what appears to be the
corner of a book sticking out from the sand. He kneels, and picks up the book and brushes it off. The title, though tarnished from time, wind, and tide, is still readable - "The Meaning of Social Credit." The islanders had never heard of this before, but he has not had a book to read for a long time, so he sits down on the beach to read it. A nd as he reads, he becomes more and more interested and excited. He realizes that this book holds the real answers to his island's financial problem. The book describes how a community can function very well by simply creating a Balance Sheet, a system of debits and credits...

He runs back to relate the exiting news of his discovery to the rest of the community. As he gathers the islanders to discuss his find, the banker watches with concern. Is his jug up? Has he been found out? Is the community finally ready to take back its property, and reconstruct it, and once again have prosperity and cooperation?

Friends, only you can answer these questions, because the island I talk about is your country, and the community I refer to is all of us.

The story paints a rather dismal picture of the banking system in our country. Please understand, the average bank manager, teller or loans officer, has absolutely no knowledge of what you have just learned. They are merely pawns in a much larger game. But rest assured, those in the upper levels of management in the finance industry are absolutely certain of what they are doing, and how it affects the citizens of this country... Any system that enslaves and controls a population in the way that our finance system does, cannot possibly be from the Lord. So there is only one other place it could come from...

Banks do not lend out depositors' money Does anybody here know where the banks get the money that they lend out? Actually, most people assume that they lend out depositors' money. But the Bank Act specifies that the bank must retain the depositor's money on account, and must pay him interest on it.

So, where else might the bank get the money?

The Bank Act also specifies that the bank may create, out of nothing, new credit ("money") through loans, but that it must have a relationship to the deposits. Originally, the banks were allowed to lend out six times their deposits, but today banks are allowed to issue new credit up to 26 times their deposits. That means that if I deposit my $1,000 in a Canadian bank, then that bank can issue loans to the tune of $26,000... Go to the bank, get a loan, and ask for the loan proceeds in cash. No matter the size of the loan, you cannot get it in cash - it must be deposited to your account, and cheques written in order to access the money. No tangible money is ever created; only debits and credits (figures) are created...
Today in Canada, the only source of money, whether private, corporate, or governmental need, is a loan from a bank. But you can never borrow your way out of debt. You can only borrow your way into bankruptcy, at which time you turn your back on your assets and your hard work, and give up possession of it to those to whom you owe money, but who gave absolutely no vested interest in your property...

1917: the Federal Income Tax

Now that we understand that the national debt can never be fully repaid using the current system of finance, the question arises: How, then, does it get paid? In 1917, after finding out that the debt was beginning to build, the Federal Government usurped the powers of the provincial governments and, under the guise of the War Debt, instituted the War Debt Income Tax Act. The Act was unconstitutional then, and it is still unconstitutional today. When it was enacted, it was on a voluntary basis, at a rate of 10%, and applied only to those earning $10,000 or more per year. In 1917, the average yearly salary was about $250.

The Income Tax Act could have more appropriately been named the Bank Interest Debt Income Tax Act; but then, people would have fought to the death to keep it out of effect. Since that time, the Federal Government has seen fit to increase the tax rate as high as 65% on high-income individuals, and has also seen fit to remove the lower limits to the point that, as you know, everyone is required to pay...

And now we have had the GST, which in my opinion is equaly as unconstitutional, rammed down our throats by a group of MPs that brashly and boldly declare that they are smarter than we are, and they know best...

Facing up to reality

Our Federal Government has gone so far away from the Constitution, in nearly every area of jurisdiction, that it now conspires to change it altogether. But that is not the solution. Getting back to the way it was written is the solution...

Each one of us selects his mode and method of doing battles with oppressive government. Some of us do it by speaking out... some of us join non-party political groups, some of us pray, and most of us do nothing. We have a condition called the "ostrich syndrome." If we ignore it and don't look at it, it might go away! But remember this: if your head is in the sand, your butt is an open target!

The Hart System: tax avoidance Federal Income Tax is illegal

I handle my fight personally using a system called the Hart System of Effective Tax Avoidance. Gerry Hart passed avay recently in Winnipeg, but not before becoming Canada's undisputed champion No. 1 tax fighter. Mr. Hart for many years opted to take an aggressive and active position against oppressive government, and he has not paid income tax in nearly 50 years. During that time, he has been imposed upon, charged, harassed, his privacy invaded, and his person subjected to illegal search. But he has never given an inch. He has been to the Manitoba Court of Appeal 22 times, but has never lost.

In 1950 Gerry Hart received a copy of a Vancouver newspaper article which reported on a recent ruling made by the Supreme Court of Canada. He then requested a copy of the ruling itself, from the Supreme Court

Chancery in Ottawa. He also requested a copy of the B.N.A. Act, because the ruling quoted various sections of that document. He found, just as the newspaper had reported, that Section 91 and 92 of the B.N.A. Act do not allow for the Federal Government to be in the Income Tax business.

The two documents - the Supreme Court ruling and the B.N.A. Act - have been the basis of his battle, and the only two cocuments he has needed. He has never had the benefit of legal counsel, and has chosen to appear in court by himself. His only evidence has been those two documents. Charges against him have been thrown out of court 22 times. The last time, some twelve or so years ago, Revenue Canada was told that if it ever brought Gerry Hart back into court, that Revenue Canada itself would be charged with contempt of court.

Gerry Hart has never been convicted under the Income Tax Act. As he says, "Income Tax is illegal. Therefore the collection of it is also illegal. Since Revenue Canada has no legal method of collecting income tax, they must resort to illegal means." Those illegal means include harassment, intimidation, illegal search, illegal seizure, violation of privacy, extortion, coercion, and complete ignorance and contempt for the human rights of Canadian citizens...

We have various books and booklets available to help to educate on how to prepare to stop paying these illegal taxes. If our "Tax Kit" can help you to avoid several thousands of dollars of tax, it is certainly worth its small investment. Be sure to protect yourself from Revenue Canada before you get involved in this tax fight. Read the books, and find out how...

If you still have questions after you have read the books, then call me. I'll try to help you. I have not paid income tax since 1978, and I have used Gerry Hart's System of Effective Tax Avoidance. I know it works; I'm living proof.
Ladies and Gentlemen: I've talked for a long time. But I cannot overstress the lateness of the hour. We all know what needs to be done, so let's get busy and get to it!

Murray Gauvreau
.........................................................................
Until State of Quebec recognise his sovereignty, this email still in conformity with the Supreme Court of Canada judgement CSC 14.27704 dated on 2002/02/21
http://www.industriequebec.ca/portal/fr/Content.php?id=300
Isn't a JURISDIC FICTICIOUS PERSON, a SOCIAL REASON or a COMMERCIAL ENTITY created by Government.

Jean-Paul Massie :
Living Man made of blood flesh and bones and with a Soul created by Almighty God that is not to sell.

  "Une fois que des parties de la nation ont le contrôle de la monnaie et du crédit, il importe pas qui fait les lois de la nations. L'usure, une fois insérée dans le contrôle, détruira n'importe quelle nation. Avant que le contrôle de la publication de  la monnaie et du crédit ne soit reconstitué(rétabli) au gouvernement et reconnu comme sa responsabilité la plus sacrée, toute la conversation de souveraineté du Parlement et de la démocratie est inoccupée(inutile) et futile."

Le Premier ministre William Lyon Mackenzie Roi, parlant de la BANQUE DU CANADA in1935 :

Voici le commencement de la preuve physique que la BANQUE DU CANADA est une société totalement privée. Voir le fichier attaché "De la rubrique de la Liste d'adresses Locale - les pages D'affaires - font appeler(paginent) 29, le Canada Bank.jpg. Si la Banque centrale est un établissement public propre par le gouvernement fédéral, il NE DOIT PAS ÊTRE INSCRIT DANS DES PAGES DES AFFAIRES, mais SEULEMENT dans les pages bleues du gouvernement de la rubrique de la liste d'adresses du Canada.

51 % de la deuxième classe non votante des actions (B) est retenu par le Ministre des Finances du Gouvernement du Canada!

Actions de première classe de 49 % (A) sont retenues par le cartel de la BANQUE DU CANADA!

Le ministre des Finances a seulement un droit consultatif sur le conseil de la BANQUE DU CANADA!

LE GOUVERNEMENT DU CANADA N'A AUCUN MOT  À DIRE AU GOUVERNEUR DE LA BANQUE DU CANADA en ce qui a trait à LA POLITIQUE (monétaire)DE L'ARGENT!

 * LA BANQUE DU CANADA INC. FAIT de SES PROPRIÉTAIRES PRIVÉS (LES CARTELS DE BANQUIERS INTERNATIONAUX) WHEALTYER EN RASSEMBLANT L'IMPÔT SUR LE REVENU SUR LE TRAVAIL DES GENS CANADIENS!

 * CRÉER L'INFLATION OU LA DÉFLATION, LA BANQUE DU CANADA INC. JOUAIENT TOUJOURS AVEC LA VALEUR DE NOTRE MONNAIE NON BASÉE SUR L'OR, MAIS RÉDUISENT L'AIR!

 * PENDANT DES DÉCENNIES, CE JEU MONOPOLISTE était LA CAUSE  de LA DOULEUR ÉNORME  SUBIS par les GENS DU CANADA!

 * IL EST TOTALEMENT FAUX DE DIRE QUE, VERS LA FIN DE LA GUERRE MONDIALE UN EN 1918, LES PRIX DES MARCHANDISES CANADIENNES ONT ÉTÉ LEVÉS de 50 %, 75 %, 100 %, 500 % OU 1000 %!

 * L'ENCRE DE la BANQUE DU CANADA a IMPRIMÉ 45 MILLIARDS DE DOLLARS, mais ce n'est pas ASSEZ pour REMBOURSER LE PRINCIPAL QUI EST de 600 MILLIARDS DE DOLLARS DE DETTE .

 * AVEC LA SOMME D'ARGENT TOUJOURS DANS DES ORDINATEURS, IL Y A 1000 MILLIARDS DE DOLLARS AU CANADA.

 * IL EST TOTALEMENT FAUX DE DIRE QUE LES GENS CANADIENS SERONT CAPABLES DE REMBOURSER les 600 MILLIARDS DE DOLLARS DE DETTE QUI N'EXISTE PAS!

 * C'est une FRAUDE COMMISE SUR LE dos des CANADIENS!

 * RENDRE LE POUVOIR AU GOUVERNEMENT CANADIEN POUR IMPRIMER UN ARGENT PERMANENT STABLE!

 * C'EST SON DROIT ABSOLU GARANTI SELON LA CONSTITUTION de 1867!

La seule façon de réaliser ce but, c'est par une conscience personnelle de la situation et par une pression organisée nationale civile sur les représentants ÉLUS. Le gouvernement fédéral doit prendre le contrôle de la monnaie et du crédit et imprimer l'argent canadien comme cela était avant que l'acte de BANQUE DU CANADA n'ait été adopté en 1934.
 *
LA CONSTITUTION de 1867 DONNE SEULEMENT AUX PROVINCES LE DROIT D'ÉTABLIR DES LOIS D'IMPÔT SUR LE REVENU!
 *
L'IMPÔT SUR LE REVENU FÉDÉRAL SUR  LE TRAVAIL DES HOMMES ET DES FEMMES EST TOTALEMENT ILLÉGAL!

Le brin la retraite de la Province du Québec de la Fédération canadienne en 1968, le Québec n'est plus une province canadienne, mais un État légal qui n'est pas supposé se soumettent aux lois canadiennes.

L'IMPÔT SUR LE REVENU CANADIEN EST UNE FRAUDE COMMISE SUR LES GENS DE L'ÉTAT DU QUÉBEC!

Les gens de l'État du Québec doivent rapidement reconnaître ce fait et demander poliment au Canada de sortir du Québec!

L'impôt sur le revenu Fédéral du Canada est inconstitutionnel.

La constitution donne au Gouvernement Fédéral le droit de publier sa propre monnaie.
 .............................................................................................................

Voici des extraits d'un papier qui a été livré en octobre, 1991, par M. Murray Gauvreau, d'Alberta, à un séminaire de la Ligue canadienne de Droits, à Calgary, qui a été publié en juillet, 1992 la publication "du Service secret canadien" (55 - 8ème Ave. S.E., Haute Rivière, Alberta T1V 1E8) :

Murray Gauvreau

Je voudrais parler avec vous aujourd'hui de l'argent, de l'intérêt, de la dette et de la taxation. Merci pour votre intérêt et pour l'arrivée pour m'entendre parle. Je suis sûr que tous d'entre vous sont intéressés par l'Impôt d'Imcome et le GST. Je ne ferai aucun doute de vous donner quelques faits d'instruction. Pour entièrement comprendre le problème auquel nous faisons face aujourd'hui au Canada, nous discuterons brièvement quelques aspects importants de notre histoire.

De plus, j'essayerai de vous donner une compréhension de comment beaucoup d'impôts nous payons maintenant est arrivé. Je proposerai aussi quelques solutions de notre dilemme. Mais tenez s'il vous plaît cela en mémoire : notre problème est perçu pour être énorme et complexe et il est destiné à ceux qui sont dans le pouvoir que vous sentez exactement cette voie, pour que vous estimiez impuissants en faire tout. Mais après qu'aujourd'hui vous saurez à coup sûr que notre problème n'est pas complexe du tout et qu'il n'est pas sans solution.

1867 - le B.N.A. Acte

À la suite d'avoir profité de beaucoup de cours d'avancement de carrière offerts par l'industrie d'assurance-vie, j'ai pris conscience que les banques ont le droit exclusif de publier la monnaie au Canada, comme déterminé selon l'Acte de Banque Fédéral. Mais je ne les ai pas vus imprimant l'argent, donc j'ai décidé de découvrir exactement comment ils publient la monnaie. Ma recherche m'a mené en arrière dans la première histoire de notre nation et dans l'histoire de notre Province...

Donc retournons en arrière, à l'année 1867 et examinons les pages de la Constitution canadienne, généralement connue comme l'Amérique du Nord Britannique (B.N.A). Acte. Se trouve là-dedans la solution réelle des maux  ociaux et économiques, dont notre pays souffre aujourd'hui. C'est le même document aujourd'hui qu'il était quand il a été écrit s'il y a longtemps.

Le B.N.A. L'acte a été écrit pour établir la base légale pour ce pays. Toutes les lois ordonnées au Canada, si par le gouvernement municipal, provincial, ou fédéral, doivent observer les termes du B.N.A. Acte. S'ils ne font pas, ils sont alors inconstitutionnels, ou en termes légaux "anti-statutaires," et peuvent être rejetés comme la loi. Le document appartient aux gens du Canada et pas aux parlementaires ou aux cours, ou au Premier ministre ,ni aux Premiers ministres... Il appartient aux gens.

La Constitution canadienne n'a pas été changée ou changée quand il a été apporté à la maison par M. Trudeau, comme certains suggèrent. Cependant, il y avait un complément très important fait à cela à ce temps-là. Ce complément était le Canadien Bill de Droits de l'homme. Aujourd'hui la Constitution canadienne, comme nous le savons, est comprise de l'original B.N.A. Acte et l'Acte de Droits de l'homme, ensemble...

L'impôt direct appartient aux provinces

Il y a deux sections spécifiques du B.N.A. L'acte qui traite avec la délégation d'autorité entre les Gouvernements Fédéraux et Provinciaux. Les sections 91 et 92 traitent avec l'autorité pour les types divers de taxation, qui a l'autorité pour prélever que des impôts et divers autres secteurs de juridiction.

L'Acte est très spécifique dans sa direction. Le droit d'imposer le revenu, connu comme l'impôt "direct", a été délégué aux provinces; et il a été clairement indiqué que n'importe quelles sommes d'argent si levées(prélevées) doivent être levées provincialement et employées pour des buts provinciaux. Le Gouvernement Fédéral a été dénié du droit de prélever l'impôt sur le revenu.

Mais la Cour suprême du Canada va plus loin. Elle déclare que l'on ne permet à aucun niveau ou gouvernement de transférer son autorité à un autre niveau de gouvernement et si le transfert a été essayé par un niveau, il ne pourrait pas légalement être accepté par un autre.

Le 3 octobre 1950, la Cour suprême du Canada a passé une décision dans le cas impliquant le Lord Nelson Hotel d'Halifax, Nova Scotia, contre l'Attorneys-général de Nova Scotia et le Canada. Le cas a impliqué le transfert de pouvoirs du Provincial au Gouvernement Fédéral et a été directement rapproché de l'Acte d'impôt sur le revenu. Dans une décision à sept juges unanime, la cour la plus haute à notre pays a décidé que les transferts de pouvoir ne peuvent pas légalement avoir lieu. On a donné lau Gouvernement Fédéral jusqu'en 1962 pour s'enlever de tous tels accords de transfert de pouvoir, incluant l'affaire d'Impôt sur le revenu et abandonner l'Acte d'Impôt sur le revenu...

Clairement, le Gouvernement Fédéral n'a aucun droit constitutionnel de s'engager dans l'affaire de l'Impôt sur le revenu, ou un autre type d'impôt direct, ni de la part de lui-même, ni de la part des provinces. Donc, l'Acte d'Impôt sur le revenu est, en soi, inconstitutionnel et n'a pas besoin d'être obéi...

Le Gouvernement Fédéral peut créer son propre Monnaie. C'est intéressant de noter que les mêmes sections du B.N.A. L'acte qui rejette(dénie) au Gouvernement Fédéral le droit de prélever l'impôt sur le revenu, a cependant prévu le moyen par lequel le Gouvernement Fédéral pourrait en lever un.

Capitale. Sectons 91 (14, 15,16, 28, 29 et 20) donnent l'autorité au Gouvernement Fédéral et la responsabilité, pour le contrôle et la publication de notre monnaie, basée sur les ressources et la richesse de la nation. On leur a donné une provision illimitée d'argent libre de dette avec lequel faire fonctionner le pays. Tout ce qu'ils ont dû faire était de l'imprimer. Et ils l'ont fait juste  pendant les 46 premières années de notre pays.

Le gouvernement donne aux banques le crédit du monopole. Alors, environ 46 ans après que la Confédération, en 1913, on a mal conseillé(informé) nos parlementaires dans l'accomplissement d'une injustice grave pour générations futures de Canadiens en passant un amendement au B.N.A. Acte (sans référendum!) généralement connu comme l'Acte de Banque. Selon cet acte, le Gouvernement Fédéral a donné au système bancaire le droit unique de créer le crédit financier (en réalité, "l'argent") de notre nation. Et pendant les 79(1992) dernières années, le système privé bancaire a exercé cette prérogative monopolistique de création et la direction du crédit canadien populaire financier.

Bien, les banques ne travaillent pas gratuitement... Ils chargent "de l'intérêt". Ils chargent même l'intérêt au Gouvernement. Et l'intérêt ne peut jamais être récompensé; il continue juste à s'additionner et , jusqu'à aujourd'hui notre dette nationale seul s'approche de 600 milliards $.

Fait naufrage dans une île (la note de Rédacteur : à ce point de son discours, M. Gauvreau explique en détail de la même histoire liée par Louis Even dans "le Mythe d'Argent Éclaté," autrefois appelé "le Sauvetage Islan" :)

 Supposons que certains d'entre nous, cette après-midi, sont devenus des survivants de naufrage et que nous sommes échoués dans une île déserte. Nos seuls moyens de survie sont de s'entraider pour faire ces choses qui sont nécessaires pour l'amélioration de notre nouvelle communauté, avant que nous ne puissions être sauvés. Un d'entre nous devient un fermier, un un pêcheur, un un charpentier, et cetera.

Chacun d'entre nous a son propre rôle pour jouer pour la survie de la communauté. Personne n'a d'argent et au moins pour l'instant, il n'y a aucun besoin de l'argent, Tous contribuent également et tous sont sur le même niveau économique. Nous échangeons d'une manière satisfaisante nos marchandises et services par le troc. Mais graduellement, comme la communauté se développe, il devient apparent que l'argent sera nécessaire. Bob a déjà une maison et le charpentier n'a pas besoin d'autre cent livres de poisson. Mais nous devons nous associer, coopérer et continuer à contribuer à la communauté. Il doit y avoir un moyens acceptables et équitables d'échanger nos marchandises et services...

Alors un jour, comme la communauté est assis sur la plage, parlant de leur problème, nous remarquons un autre radeau s'approchant de l'île. Tous sont heureux de voir un nouveau visage et nous saluons la nouvelle arrivée chaudement. Comme nous continuons à parler, quelqu'un dans la communauté dit l'arrivée regarde notre dilemme, de comment nous avons commencé la communauté, l'a développé, l'a construit par la coopération et s'est avancé au point où nous avons maintenant besoin de quelque forme d'échange pour aider la communauté à grandir et fleurir. Les yeux de la nouvelle arrivée s'allument. "J'ai la réponse à votre problème," dit la nouvelle arrivée. "Je suis un banquier. Je me mettrai au travail tout de suite pour vous imprimer de l'argent."

Le matin suivant, la communauté entière se rencontre devant la nouvelle maison du banquier. Comme le banquier distribue l'argent, il nous rappelle que l'argent lui appartient et que nous "ne le"possédons pas", mais que nous pouvons seulement"l'emprunter" et que nous devons payer un petits honoraires du privilège de l'utilisation de cela. Nous pouvons le payer à la fin de l'année. Et il demande que chaque personne signe l'accord pour payer 5 %, qui n'est certainement pas un intérêt excessif.

La dette ne peut pas être remboursée durant la première année . La communauté fonctionne et prospère pendant l'année; alors à la fin de l'année nous retournons au banquier, lui payer en arrière ce que nous avions emprunté. Mais nous trouvons, à notre inquiétude, que nous ne pouvons pas rembourser le prêt, parce que nous n'avons pas assez d'argent. Nous constatons que nous devons maintenant tout ce que nous avions emprunté, plus 5 %, ce qui est l'intérêt. Le 1,000 $ que nous avions emprunté est maintenant devenu 1,050 $. Puisqu'il n'y a évidemment aucune façon de rembourser le 50 $, qui est l'intérêt, le banquier suggère que nous laissions le prêt sur les livres comme un 1,000 $, laissant une quantité moindre de 950 $ pour chacun d'entre nous pour fonctionner durant l'année prochaine. N'en voyant aucune autre réponse réelle, la communauté est d'accord aux nouveaux termes et essaye de fonctionner avec moins d'argent pendant une autre année.

À la fin de la deuxième année, la communauté fait face un problème semblable, mais plus grand. Dans l'achat en bas le prêt, nous constatons que notre fonds de roulement a maintenant été coupé de 10 %, à 900 $. Nous nous rendons compte que si on permet au plan de continuer, le banquier possédera l'île, en entier, ayant contribué rien que le papier et l'encre (la comptabilité) qui était habituée monetize au crédit réel de la communauté en premier lieu. Quelque chose de la protestation d'insulaires.

Mais le banquier a maintenant eu une couple d'années pour se préparer pendant ce jour. Pour résister l'objection qui est inévitable, il a pris des pas évasifs. Il a employé le temps pour développer la crédibilité dans la communauté pour nous instruire quant à comment de valeur son service a et qu'une contribution excellente il a fait à la communauté. Il a établi des collèges(universités) et des universités se spécialisant dans l'économie et apprend à nos enfants et nos éducateurs tous de son système d'argent. Il assure que peu, s'il en est tels dans la communauté sont conscients qu'il y a une autre voie; et il encourage la communauté à escompter comme ridicule n'importe quelle suggestion qu'il puisse y avoir une meilleure façon de financer une communauté...

La solution : CreditThen Social sur lequel un jour, un des insulaires décide de prendre une promenade le long de la plage et délibéré ce qui est arrivé à la communauté. Comme il flâne le long, la tête en bas, la pensée, il remarque ce qui semble être le coin d'un livre tenant du sable. Il se met à genoux et prend le livre et le brosse. Le titre, quoique terni du temps, le vent et la marée, est toujours lisible - "la Signification de Crédit Social." Les insulaires n'avaient jamais entendu parler de cela auparavant, mais il n'a pas eu de livre pour lire pendant une longue période de temps, donc il s'assied sur la plage pour le lire. Un nd comme il lit, il devient de plus en plus intéressé et excité. Il se rend compte que ce livre tient les réponses réelles au problème financier de son île. Le livre décrit comment une communauté peut fonctionner très bien en créant simplement un Bilan, un système de débits et des crédits...

Il revient rapidement pour rapprocher(raporter) les nouvelles sortantes de sa découverte au reste de la communauté. Comme il réunit les insulaires pour discuter de sa trouvaille, les montres de banquier avec le souci(entreprise). Est-ce sa cruche ? A-t-il été découvert ? La communauté se prépare finalement à recouvrer sa propriété et la reconstruire et avoir de nouveau la prospérité et la coopération ?

Des amis, seulement vous pouvez répondre à ces questions, parce que l'île dont je parle est votre pays et la communauté auquelle je me réfère représente nous tous.

L'histoire peint une image plutôt morne du système bancaire dans notre pays. Comprenez s'il vous plaît , le manager de banque moyen, le caissier ou prête l'officier, a absolument aucune connaissance de ce que vous venez d'apprendre. Ils sont simplement des pions dans un beaucoup plus grand jeu. Mais le repos assuré, ceux dans les niveaux supérieurs de gestion dans l'industrie de finances sont absolument certains de ce qu'ils font et comment il affecte les citoyens de ce pays... N'importe quel système qui asservit et contrôle une population dans la voie que notre système de finances fait, ne peut pas probablement être (venir) du Seigneur. Ainsi il y a seulement une autre place d'où il pourrait venir...

Les banques ne prêtent pas de l'argent des déposants; quelqu'un ici sait-il où les banques obtiennent l'argent dont ils prêtent ? En réalité, la plupart des personnes supposent qu'ils prêtent de l'argent des déposants. Mais l'Acte de Banque indique(spécifie) que la banque doit conserver l'argent du déposant sur le compte et doit lui payer l'intérêt sur cela.

Ainsi, où autrement la banque pourrait-elle obtenir l'argent ?

L'Acte de Banque indique(spécifie) aussi que la banque peut créer, de rien, le nouveau crédit ("l'argent") par des prêts, mais qu'il doit avoir un rapport aux dépôts. À l'origine, on a permis aux banques de prêter de six fois leurs dépôts (entente de 10 fois la valeur des dépôts en 1689, soit 5 ans avant la fondation de la Banque d'Angleterre qui a mis ce système en exécussion), mais aujourd'hui on permet aux banques de publier le nouveau crédit jusqu'à 26 fois leurs dépôts. Cela signifie que si je dépose mon 1,000 $ dans une banque canadienne, alors cette banque peut publier des prêts sans fonds de 26,000 $... Allez à la banque, obtenez un prêt et demandez les revenus de prêt dans l'argent comptant. Peu importe la taille du prêt, vous ne pouvez pas l'obtenir dans l'argent comptant - il doit être déposé à votre compte et des chèques écrits pour avoir accès à l'argent. Aucun argent tangible n'est jamais créé; seulement les débits et des crédits (des chiffres((figures)) sont créés...

Aujourd'hui au Canada, la seule source d'argent, si le besoin privé, d'entreprise, ou gouvernemental, est un prêt d'une banque. Mais vous ne pouvez jamais emprunter votre sortie de dette. Vous pouvez seulement emprunter votre voie dans la faillite, à laquelle le temps vous tournez votre dos sur vos actifs et votre travail dur et en renoncez(cédez) à la possession à ceux-là à qui vous devez de l'argent, mais qui n'a donné absolument aucun droit acquis dans votre propriété...

1917: L'Impôt sur le revenu Fédéral

Maintenant que nous comprenons que la dette nationale ne peut jamais être entièrement récompensée (remboursée) employant le système actuel de finances, la question surgit : Comment, alors, peut-elle être payée ? En 1917, après la découverte que la dette commençait à construire, le Gouvernement Fédéral a usurpé les pouvoirs des gouvernements provinciaux et, sous l'apparence de la Dette de Guerre, a institué l'Acte d'Impôt sur le revenu de Guerre de Dettes. L'Acte était inconstitutionnel alors et c'est toujours inconstitutionnel aujourd'hui. Quand il a été ordonné, il était sur une base volontaire, à un taux de 10 % et s'est adressé seulement à ceux gagnant 10,000 $ ou plus par an. En 1917, le salaire moyen annuel était d'environ 250 $.

L'Acte d'Impôt sur le revenu pourrait avoir plus convenablement été nommé l'Acte d'Impôt sur le revenu de Dette d'Intérêt de Banque; mais alors, les gens se seraient battus à la mort pour le tenir de l'effet. Depuis ce temps-là, le Gouvernement Fédéral a vu convenable d'augmenter le taux fiscal aussi haut que 65 % sur des individus à revenus élevés et a aussi vu convenable d'enlever les limites inférieures au point que, comme vous savez, on exige que chacun paye...

Et maintenant nous avons eu le GST, qui, à mon avis, est également inconstitutionnel, enfoncé dans nos gorges par un groupe de DÉPUTÉS qu'impétueusement ils déclarent courageusement qu'ils sont plus chic que nous et ils savent mieux aussi...

Faisant face à la réalité

Notre Gouvernement Fédéral est parti jusqu'ici loin de la Constitution, dans presque chaque secteur de juridiction, qu'il conspire maintenant de le changer en tout. Mais ce n'est pas la solution. Récupérant à la voie ce qui a été écrit est la solution...

Chaqu'un d'entre nous choisit son mode et méthode de faire des batailles avec le gouvernement oppressant. Certains d'entre nous le font en prononçant... Certains d'entre nous joignent(rejoignent) des groupes indépendants politiques, certains d'entre nous prient et la plupart d'entre nous ne font rien. Nous avons une condition appelée "le syndrome de l'autruche." Si nous l'ignorons et ne le regardons pas, il pourrait partir! Mais rappelez-vous cela : si votre tête est dans le sable, votre derrière est une cible ouverte!

Le Système de Cerf : action d'éviter l'impôt fiscale sur le revenu Fédéral est illégale

Je manipule mon combat employant personnellement un système appelé le Système de Cerf d'Action d'éviter Efficace Fiscale. Gerry le Cerf a passé outre récemment dans Winnipeg, mais pas avant le devenir du champion incontesté du Canada No 1 comme lutteur fiscal. M. Hart a pendant plusieurs d'années opté de prendre une position agressive et active contre le gouvernement oppressant et il n'a pas payé d'impôt sur le revenu dans presque 50 ans. Pendant ce temps-là, il a été imposé à, chargé, harcelé, sa vie privée envahie et sa personne soumise à la recherche illégale. Mais il n'a jamais cédé un pouce. Il a été à la Cour d'appel du Manitoba 22 fois, mais n'a jamais perdu.

En 1950 Gerry Hart a reçu une copie d'un article de journal de Vancouver qui a fait un rapport sur une décision récente faite par la Cour suprême du Canada. Il a alors demandé une copie de la décision lui-même, de la Cour suprême de la Chancellerie à Ottawa. Il a aussi demandé une copie du B.N.A. L'acte, parce que la décision a cité les sections diverses de ce document. Il a trouvé, de même que le journal avait annoncé, que la Section 91 et 92 du B.N.A. L'acte ne tient pas compte du Gouvernement Fédéral pour être dans l'affaire d'Impôt sur le revenu.

Les deux documents - la décision de la Cour suprême et le B.N.A. L'acte - a été la base de sa bataille et le deux seul documents qu'il a eu besoin. Il n'a jamais eu l'avantage de conseil légal et a voulu apparaître dans la cour tout seul. Sa seule preuve a été ces deux documents. Les charges contre lui ont été jetées de la cour 22 fois. La dernière fois, environ douze ans ou ainsi des années, le Revenu on a dit au Canada que s'il a jamais apporté à Hart Gerry de revenir en arrière dans la cour, que le Revenu du Canada lui-même serait chargée du mépris de cour.

Gerry Hart n'ont jamais été reconnu coupable sous l'Acte d'Impôt sur le revenu. Comme il dit, "l'Impôt sur le revenu est illégal. Donc la collection(ramassage) de cela est aussi illégale. Depuis le Revenu le Canada n'a aucune méthode légale pour ramasser L'impôt sur le revenu , ils doivent recourir aux moyens illégaux." Ces moyens illégaux incluent le harcèlement, l'intimidation, la recherche illégale, la saisie illégale, la violation de vie privée, l'extorsion, la contrainte et achèvent l'ignorance et le mépris pour les droits de l'homme du citoyens canadiens...

Nous avons des livres divers et des livrets disponibles pour aider à instruire sur comment préparer à arrêter de payer ces impôts illégaux. Si notre "le Kit Fiscal" peut vous aider à éviter plusieurs milliers des dollars d'impôt, il vaut certainement son petit investissement. Assurez-vous de vous protéger du Revenu du Canada avant que vous ne soyez impliquez dans ce combat fiscal. Lisez les livres et découvrez comment...

Si vous avez toujours des questions après que vous avez lu les livres, appelez-moi donc . J'essayerai de vous aider. Je n'ai pas payé d'impôt sur le revenu depuis 1978 et j'ai employé le Système du Cerf Gerry d'Action d'éviter Efficace Fiscale. Je sais qu'il travaille; je vis la preuve.

Dames et Messieurs : j'ai parlé pendant une longue période de temps. Mais je ne peux pas surcharger le retard (l'avancement) de l'heure. Nous tous savons quels besoins doit être fait, donc devenons occupés et nous y arriverons!

Murray Gauvreau
 .........................................................................
Avant que l'État du Québec ne reconnaisse sa souveraineté, cet email toujours conformément à la Cour suprême du jugement du Canada CSC 14.27704 daté sur 2002/02/21
 http://www.industriequebec.ca/portal/fr/Content.php?id=300
N'est pas un JURISDIC FICTICIOUS LA PERSONNE, UNE RAISON SOCIALE ou une ENTITÉ COMMERCIALE créée par le Gouvernement.

Jean-Paul Massie :
La vie de l'Homme est fait de chair ,de sang et des os et avec une Âme créée par le Dieu Tout-puissant qui ne doit pas se vendre. note:Jean-Paul Massie is one of the persons helping GHIS: 
Tuesday, 08 April 2008 / from: http://www.davidicke.com/content/blogcategory/30/48/
 Ghis Imprisoned for Refusing to Endorse the Fictitious Corporation LANCTOT GHISLAINE!
'Judge Bachant then read the indictment. Ghis asked him who this was referring to: the corporation LANCTOT, GHISLAINE, or the woman with a body, a soul and a spirit that she is. She is still waiting for an answer to this question, as no judge has yet offered any. As Ghis objected to the registration of any plea, the judge ordered the clerk of the court to register a plea for non-guilt.'
http://www.davidicke.com/content/view/12543/48/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
and
 

Monday, 14 April 2008 
As I have been saying for months ... what is happening with the kangaroo-court 'Human Rights' system in Canada is designed to be a blueprint for all - that's why it is so important to constantly highlight its abuses ... and now comes this: 
Vote on freedom of expression marks the end of Universal Human Rights.
Roy W Brown
Geneva, 29 March 2008

'For the past eleven years the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), representing the 57 Islamic States, has been tightening its grip on the throat of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Yesterday, they finally killed it.With the support of their allies including China, Russia and Cuba (none well-known for their defence of human rights) the Islamic States succeeded in forcing through an amendment to a resolution on Freedom of Expression that has turned the entire concept on its head. 

The UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression will now be required to report on the “abuse” of this most cherished freedom by anyone who, for example, dares speak out against Sharia laws that require women to be stoned to death for adultery or young men to be hanged for being gay, or against the marriage of girls as young as nine, as in Iran.'
How ironic that Canada of all countries says it was opposed to the change ................ (but then didn't vote against it).
http://www.iheu.org/node/3123
 Yet since its inception in June 2006, the Human Rights Council has failed to condemn the most egregious examples of human rights abuse in the Sudan, Byelorussia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, China and elsewhere, whilst repeatedly condemning Israel and Israel alone. Three years later Annan’s dream lies shattered, and the Human Rights Council stands exposed as incapable of fulfilling its central role: the promotion and protection of human rights. The Council died yesterday in Geneva, and with it the Universal Declaration of Human Rights whose 60th anniversary we were actually celebrating this year. There has been a seismic shift in the balance of power in the UN system. For over a decade the Islamic States have been flexing their muscles. Yesterday they struck. There can no longer be any pretence that the Human Rights Council can defend human rights. The moral leadership of the UN system has moved from the States who created the UN in the aftermath of the Second World War, committed to the concepts of equality, individual freedom and the rule of law, to the Islamic States, whose allegiance is to a narrow, medieval worldview defined exclusively in terms of man’s duties towards Allah, and to their fellow-travellers, the States who see their future economic and political interests as being best served by their alliances with the Islamic States.Yesterday’s attack by the Islamists, led by Pakistan, had the subtlety of a thin-bladed knife slipped silently under the ribs of the Human Rights Council.(...)The Universal Declaration of Human Rights died yesterday. Who knows when, or if, it can ever be revived. I used to wonder what States who felt it necessary to kill people because they change their religion thought they were doing in the Human Rights Council. Now I know. The wafer-thin sham of an international consensus on the promotion and protection of human rights has finally been exposed for what it was – a sham. The fragmentation of human rights now appears inevitable. The proposed Islamic Charter on Human Rights (read “Duties towards Allah”) will certainly go ahead, as will the creation of a parallel Islamic Council on Human Rights. But the OIC will nevertheless continue to attend and dominate the UN Human Rights Council, thereby ensuring its continuing emasculation and descent into total irrelevance.(...)States who are genuinely concerned with human rights should immediately withdraw from the Council until such time as all member states as well as those offering themselves for election agree to honour their pledges, and undertake to expel any member state which, having been put on notice regarding its human rights record, fails to put its house in order within a reasonable timescale. Failing this, what better tribute to Sergio de Mello could there be than to create an alternative organisation – Kofi Annan’s organisation of the willing - whose members agree to adopt Sergio de Mello’s guidelines and code of conduct – and are actually held to account. Roy W Brown
Geneva, 29 March 2008

et since its inception in June 2006, the Human Rights Council has failed to condemn the most egregious examples of human rights abuse in the Sudan, Byelorussia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, China and elsewhere, whilst repeatedly   condemning Israel and Israel alone. 

  Three years later Annan’s dream lies shattered, and the Human Rights Council stands exposed as incapable of fulfilling its central role: the promotion and protection of human rights. The Council died yesterday in Geneva, and   with it the Universal Declaration of Human Rights whose 60th anniversary we were actually celebrating this year. 

  There has been a seismic shift in the balance of power in the UN system. For over a decade the Islamic States have been flexing their muscles. Yesterday they struck. There can no longer be any pretence that the Human   Rights Council can defend human rights. The moral leadership of the UN system has moved from the States who created the UN in the aftermath of the Second World War, committed to the concepts of equality, individual   freedom and the rule of law, to the Islamic States, whose allegiance is to a narrow, medieval worldview defined exclusively in terms of man’s duties towards Allah, and to their fellow-travellers, the States who see their future   economic and political interests as being best served by their alliances with the Islamic States.  Yesterday’s attack by the Islamists, led by Pakistan, had the subtlety of a thin-bladed knife slipped silently under the ribs of the Human Rights Council.

  (...)
  The Universal Declaration of Human Rights died yesterday. Who knows when, or if, it can ever be revived. 

  I used to wonder what States who felt it necessary to kill people because they change their religion thought they were doing in the Human Rights Council. Now I know. 

  The wafer-thin sham of an international consensus on the promotion and protection of human rights has finally been exposed for what it was – a sham. The fragmentation of human rights now appears inevitable. The proposed  Islamic Charter on Human Rights (read “Duties towards Allah”) will certainly go ahead, as will the creation of a parallel Islamic Council on Human Rights. But the OIC will nevertheless continue to attend and dominate the   UN Human Rights Council, thereby ensuring its continuing emasculation and descent into total irrelevance.
  (...)

  States who are genuinely concerned with human rights should immediately withdraw from the Council until such time as all member states as well as those offering themselves for election agree to honour their pledges, and   undertake to expel any member state which, having been put on notice regarding its human rights record, fails to put its house in order within a reasonable timescale. Failing this, what better tribute to Sergio de Mello could   there be than to create an alternative organisation – Kofi Annan’s organisation of the willing - whose members agree to adopt Sergio de Mello’s guidelines and code of conduct – and are actually held to account.

   Roy W Brown

  Geneva, 29 March 2008

Et depuis son commencement en juin 2006, le Conseil de Droits de l'homme a échoué à condamner les exemples les plus insignes de violation des droits de l'homme au Soudan, en Biélorussie, l'Iran, l'Arabie Saoudite, la Chine et ailleurs, pendant qu'à plusieurs reprises la condamnation de l'Israël et l'Israël seul. 

 Trois ans le mensonge de rêve d'Annan postérieur a volé en éclats et les stands(positions) de Conseil de Droits de l'homme exposés comme incapable d'accomplir son rôle central : la promotion et protection de droits de l'homme. Le Conseil est mort hier à Genève et avec cela la Déclaration Universelle de Droits de l'homme dont le 60ème anniversaire nous célébrait en réalité cette année. 

 Il y a eu un changement sismique dans l'équilibre des forces dans le système de l'ONU. Car  de par plus d'une décennie les États Islamiques ont fléchi leurs muscles. Hier ils ont frappé. Il ne peut plus y avoir de prétexte que le Conseil de Droits de l'homme peut défendre des droits de l'homme. La direction morale du système de l'ONU s'est déplacée des États qui ont créé l'ONU après la Deuxième Guerre mondiale, remise aux concepts d'égalité, de liberté individuelle et de l'autorité de la loi, aux États Islamiques, dont l'allégeance est à une vue du monde étroite, médiévale définie exclusivement en termes des devoirs de l'homme vers Allah et à leurs compagnons de voyage, les États qui voient leurs intérêts futurs économiques et politiques comme étant le mieux servi par leurs alliances avec les États Islamiques. L'attaque d'hier par l'Islamists, mené par le Pakistan, avait la subtilité d'un couteau mince-à lames a glissé silencieusement sous les nervures du Conseil de Droits de l'homme.

 (...)
 La Déclaration Universelle de Droits de l'homme est morte hier. Qui sait quand, ou si, il peut jamais être ranimé. 

 J'ai eu l'habitude de me demander quels États qui l'ont senti nécessaires de tuer les gens parce qu'ils changent leur religion ont pensé qu'ils faisaient dans le Conseil de Droits de l'homme. Maintenant je sais. 

 La feinte ténue d'un consensus international sur la promotion et la protection de droits de l'homme a finalement été exposée pour ce qu'il était - une feinte. La fragmentation de droits de l'homme apparaît maintenant inévitable. Le Charte proposé Islamique sur des Droits de l'homme (lu "des Devoirs envers Allah") ira certainement en avant, comme feront(seront) la création d'un Conseil parallèle Islamique de Droits de l'homme. Mais l'OIC continuera néanmoins à suivre et dominer le Conseil de Droits de l'homme de3 l'ONU, assurant ainsi son émasculation ininterrompue et descente dans le manque de rapport total.
 (...)

 Les états qui sont authentiquement concernés par des droits de l'homme doivent immédiatement se retirer du Conseil jusqu'à un tel temps que tous les États membres aussi bien que ceux s'offrant pour l'élection consentent à honorer leurs gages et entreprendre expulser n'importe quel État membre qui, ayant soit mis l'avis quant à son rappor de droits de l'homme, ne réussit pas à mettre sa maison en ordre dans une durée raisonnable. À défaut, quel meilleur hommage à Sergio de Mello pourrait là être que de créer une organisation alternative - l'organisation de Kofi Annan du désirant - dont les membres consentent à adopter Sergio des directives de Mello et le code de conduite - et sont en réalité tenus pour estimer.

 Brun de Roy W

 Genève, le 29 mars 2008

.........................................................................................
 
Founded in Amsterdam in 1952, International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) is the sole world umbrella organisation embracing Humanist, atheist, rationalist , secularist, skeptic , laique, ethical cultural, freethought and similar organisations world-wide.
http://www.iheu.org/about
 
all this from david icke's page.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++