Saturday, March 31, 2012

The Work Never Ends at the Ministry of Social Engineering and Government Protection

The Ministry of Social Engineering and Government Protection is my new name for the Supreme Court of Canada. I think it more appropriate to think of them as deputy Ministers rather than Justices or Jesters of the Court. Like medieval times when the clergy were the only literate people in the kingdom; the scholars of the time who saw to the administration of the realm. Like their predecessors of old the Ministers of the SE&GP have a real sweet deal they have complete autonomous control over a branch of the Government; they have tenure for life (or age 75 which ever comes first); they can't be sacked; they have more power than the elected members of Parliament; can blame Parliament or protect parliament depending on the current agenda; strike down statutes and law(not even the queen does that these days) for a whopping 300-350k per year with a obese pension; come to think of it they have a sweeter deal.

There is a pesky myth today; that people are entitled to a day in court and a right to appeal to the highest court; nonsense!!!!! That would mean they have an entitlement to justice; as anyone who follows the goings on in our "legal system" would know there is no justice. Except where there are a few fossil judges or rebels that roil against this mockery and try to fight the system from within but they are far and few between and actually they are dying out relegated to serve out their tenure on the same bench in the same court probably in an obscure place never seeing elevation or promotion. I digress

The minister of the SE&GP are nine in total with power greater than a Queen. Set for life they are free to social engineer to their hearts content all under the guise of being judicial and official. They can even ignore their own decisions of previous rulings when deciding a matter before them either citing a unique situation(even though circumstances and points of law are very similar) or cite "community values being the tipping point of their decision. Abortion is one of the most famous rulings where security of the person was paramount despite deep division in the Canadian communities on the subject.

Freedom of speech is another right protected by the charter. Before the charter it was already a right at common law limited to what the law would allow; one could not use this right to incite the peace to be broken or used to commit fraud; criminal behaviour is never protected and slander and libel offend ones right to their reputation and good name. However I must stress that not everything the government says is criminal is unlawful. The Criminal Code of Canada has a few statutes in it that are aimed at personal pass times "victim-less" crimes. The struggle between classes of people is a political struggle and no where is it written that anyone has a right not to be offended by what some one says. Yet the hate speech statute is used regularly to attack political opponents or people that disagree with the current status quo. Our loving SE&GP has upheld this statute silencing debate on any controversial

We as Canadians and Subjects of the Crown have a right to have and carry arms for our defence. Unlike abortion no one has to stretch the meaning of a Charter right; no this right is plainly written albeit in Middle English and forms part of an unalterable part of the Constitution. I say unalterable mainly because you cannot turn one part of the Constitution on another, nor can you remove without the approval of the Provinces apart from Quebec and Ontario I would say that the other 8 provinces' Governments would be committing political suicide so agreement would be slim. As it stands the English Bill of Rights operates in full vigour in Canada.

Indeed; when the Ministry of Social Engineering and Government Protection says it does when it is trying to protect the Government as in Ref: Canada Constitutional Act and in Aurthurson when the Government is taking money away from a Veteran. However when it suits them it all of a sudden disappears as in Hasselwander which was a case involving firearms. Suddenly the Bill of Rights is meaningless. This is where they become the ever vigilant social engineers denying Canadians their right to have arms in their defence.

Two more cases involving a challenge to the firearms act(a statute not law) didn't even make it to the high court both their application for leave to appeal were dismissed without reason. Part of the quorum was the appeal Jester from Ontario that had given short shrift of the first case Montague at the first appeal and he got a second whack at someone challenging the firearms act in Hudson which involves the fundamental right to have a fair hearing before seized property could be destroyed by the Crown (a shotgun) even though this firearm was seized without charge or any criminal proceedings what ever against Dr Hudson. If either of these cases had made it to the high court it would have been news and it would brought national attention to a topic that neither the Government nor the Social Engineers in fancy dress want Canadians to know about.

I know some people would argue this on two points that A. There is no place in civil society for guns and B. We would be just like the Americans. To the first proposition I would ask: What do you think keeps society civil? Greater men than I have written volumes on the subject one in particular is Sir William Blackstone who stated that your rights would be in vain if not for this right. That you would be putting a great deal of trust in people that should not be trusted (both the Crown and Parliament) this right is the last line of defence of your rights and your freedom. The Government did not grant you your right in the first place they are not theirs to take; in truth as subjects of the Crown you were born with them.

But not according to our un-elected Ministers at Social Engineering. We have been told our rights are limited and not absolute. REALLY! Then how is it they are called rights? The Government can not give what they do not possess that is a maxim at law; no one can give what they do not have. If you have no authority you cannot give authority; if you have no rights you cannot give rights; the converse is also true you cannot take what is not yours; that is called theft. It is also called fraud when you intentionally mislead someone.

The English Parliament placed a limit on the powers of the crown. It stated categorically what the crown shall not do. It is also equally true that the House of Commons is the voice and will of the people; they took up the mantle of protecting the rights of the common people. However the Ministry of Social Engineering is of the belief that they are even supreme over Parliament they re-write statutes all the time they interpret the Charter and decide what are Canadian values; they alone have seized this authority. So like King John the first "the law is in their mouth"

I have heard it said in the media and by other commentators that Harper will remake Canada. The Ministry of Social Engineering and Government Protection has a 30 year head start on him and the ability to re-write what ever he does so how could that statement ever be true? The supreme court is far more scarier and powerful than Harper could ever be; they smile and sweetly pronounce their decisions dressed up in fine words. They not Harper will the death of freedom and democracy.

No comments:

Post a Comment