The May 2 Election Improper, Illegitimate. Null and Void. YOU READ IT HERE.
The facts are very, very simple. But first: they came to me in mid-election when I was (a) travelling, (b) sick, (c) overcome with family matters. They came to me through BC Mary from Rita Dawson.
The key facts make the election Improper, Illegitimate, Null and Void. I am going to lay out the facts as they came to me. They come originally, it seems, from a Native Canadian organization. They have been ignored by Elections Canada, by the political parties, and – of course – by the Mainstream Press and Media.
Plainly action is in the hands of Canadians. We must protest and demand an answer from Elections Canada. We must demand Elections Canada seek a ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada on the Elections Act. We must prepare to prevent Parliament from meeting if it is called with an illegitimate Harper government attempting to pretend legitimacy. We must act. Now.
Individuals, organizations of all kinds must be heard. Write Elections Canada. Now. Demand an answer. Organize.
Here is the information I received (with addresses removed for the sake of privacy):
Hello Robin,
Rita Dawson, of Ladysmith, asks that I forward this LINK to you. It didn't work for me, so I googled and got 7 results, one of which is a YouTube which catches Harper's words as he blames his citation of "Contempt of Parliament" on the Opposition. The YouTube is here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTRF92cC1k4
And here is one other.
http://www.cfne.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=5387 (this is the one Rita was trying to send)
Are you at home?
Best,
Date: April 21, 2011 7:04:30 PM GMT-04:00
To: "Mary”
Subject: NOT QUALIFIED TO RUN FOR ANY POLITICAL OFFICE!
Hi Mary,
Would you pass this along to Robin Mathews please. It would be more than merely interesting to get his take on it.
I'm sure any regular employer would think twice before hiring a person in "breach of privilege" or found to be contemptuous of government institutions. How come it's different for politicians?
Thanks,
Rita
While doing some research for a fellow activist I came across this item on a Native website. I'd say they're on to something and one would only hope that some hot-shot Constitutional lawyer is working day and night on this one 'cause, from the looks of the evidence submitted, Harper is in "breach of privilege" and isn't qualified to run for any political office.
Rita
Credit/Source: MrSteeper33
Info By: PAUL W KINCAID
Canada Elections Act
CANDIDATES -- Qualifications
http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx? ... =res&dir=loi%2Ffel%2Fcea&...
Ineligible candidates
65. The following persons are not eligible to be a candidate:
(b) a person who is dis-entitled under paragraph 502(3)(a) while they are so dis-entitled;
Stephen Harper was found guilty of the crime of contempt of parliament by the Canadian House of Commons. The guilty verdict disqualified Harper for re-election as he was dis-entitled as Prime Minister by the House of Commons.
TABLE OF OFFENCES
CANADA ELECTIONS ACT
http://www.elections.ca/res/loi/his/2000/TabOffences_e.pdf
On March 21, 2011 a House of Commons committee ruled that the Harper government was in contempt of Parliament -- an offense against the authority or dignity of Parliament, including disobedience to its commands or libel against it or its Members. Punishment for such an offense may take a variety of forms, up to and including imprisonment.
On March 25, 2011 the finding of contempt led to a motion of non-confidence introduced by Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff. The NDP and BQ supported them, which resulted in the adjournment of the 40th Parliament of Canada, and made Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government the first to fall on a charge of contempt of Parliament.
Any disregard of or attack on the rights, powers and immunities of the House and its Members, either by an outside person or body, or by a Member of the House, is referred to as a "breach of privilege" and is punishable by the House. There are, however, other affronts against the dignity and authority of Parliament which may not fall within one of the specifically defined privileges. Thus, the House also claims the right to punish, as a contempt, any action which, though not a breach of a specific privilege, tends to obstruct or impede the House in the performance of its functions; obstructs or impedes any Member or Officer of the House in the discharge of their duties; or is an offence against the authority or dignity of the House, such as disobedience of its legitimate commands or libels upon itself, its Members, or its Officers.
Source: AFC REPORT CANADA
http://afccanada.wordpress.com/2011/0 ... dont-care-about-contempt/
Source: "NATIVES SAY NO TO STEPHEN HARPERS RE-ELECTION."
(Facebook)
Link: http://www.cfne.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=5387
Organize. Write to Elections Canada demanding a reply. Prepare to be lied to and to be misled. (Elections Canada may try to escape its responsibility. It has done so before in my direct experience with it. Don’t take a flabby put-off. And Political Parties may respond out of self-interest, not the national interest. Don’t be misled by them.) Demand Elections Canada seek a Supreme Court of Canada ruling on the Elections Act. Prepare to stop Parliament from meeting in an illegitimate form. The Election is not over. It never took place!
Stumble It!
It's amazing British Columbia can contain your massive ego.
You have eliminated all doubt about your deserving the nickname I gave you so long ago. You are a gasbag!
The election showed how irrelevant you and the rest of the far-left crowd are. Even Jack Layton's NDP is more Roy Romanow than Svend Robinson.
You don't have a captive audience anymore, and nobody gives a crap about your useless anti-American ranting posing as poetry. You're nothing.
Grow up, Indie. Harper bent and broke so many rules and laws, he should be in jail for 20 years. But the good folks of Ontario chose to ignore the very things Harper rants and raves about and wants to build jails for, they no longer warrant a place in Canada.
Another sore loser heard from. See you in four years.
It seems to me the rule of law holds little sway in your political discourse. I just hope your vitriol against Mr Layton was not too nasty during the smear campaign the day before the election. Harper is an ego without equal and this country will pay dearly. Not just because of his policies but because of his disdain for the rule of law. And yours too apparently.
Perhaps yank loving Indi has no business being north of the Canada US border. All would be invaders have their Vichy quislings, promoting apathy.
So you can correctly comprehend the rest of my response, please consult the following:
http://dictionary.canadaspace.com/definition/american/
I will be using definitions #1 and #3 of this term, which are broadly accepted both within and outside of North America.
I know that rabid anti-Americans such as yourself live in a binary world where anyone who doesn't hate the US as you do are labelled "Yank-lovers" and similar epithets. Mel Hurtig, who seems about as fond of the US as you are, tends to use more pretentious words like "comprador" (or the one you used, "quisling"), but the idea is the same - that someone who isn't anti-American can't be a loyal Canadian. That is a judgement that is as faulty as it is insulting. It is in fact an instance of the "bifurcation fallacy" or "false dilemma" logical fallacy. Some more education...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
Note that this is a fallacy you share with George Bush. Bet that stings.
Simply admiring or even wishing to emulate certain aspects about the US or opposing blanket condemnations of the US or its citizens by Canadian nationalists does not make one a "quisling" or fifth columnist acting of behalf of a foreign power.
You don't hear me ranting against Sweden or Norway. I do oppose the doctrine of "Janteloven", which underlies much of Scandinavian social democracy (and by extension NDP ideology), because it is profoundly anti-individual.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janteloven
But I don't go onto Internet forums bashing Swedes or Norwegians. I don't want their system imported into Canada, but I have nothing against them or the choices they have made for themselves.
So allow me to forward on to you advice that was offered to me earlier in this thread. Grow up.
Grow up, Indie. Harper bent and broke so many rules and laws, he should be in jail for 20 years. But the good folks of Ontario chose to ignore the very things Harper rants and raves about and wants to build jails for, they no longer warrant a place in Canada.
Another sore loser heard from. See you in four years.
Seems that the rule of law is optional. With an attitude such as yours, why not just let the police forces take perps out into the alley and dispense some 9 mm "justice"?
Let me see now - we've had brown shirts and black shirts. Now it looks like the rise of the blue shirts......
The problem with you so-called "individualists" is that, in order for you to practice your "individualism" you must neceessarily embrace anarchism. All else is simply moving the goal posts in your favour, and without allowing that it impinges on the rights of others that you claim to want for yourself.
I'm anything but "Anti American' I think "America" is two great continents, consisting of 21 great countries ( and one dud). It's that arrogant, no-name country between Canada and Mexico , who's inhabitants are so embarrassed that, when asked where they are from, will only give the name of the continents, which is the problem.
See, I know how to use copy and paste too...
So you can correctly comprehend the rest of my response, please consult the following:
http://dictionary.canadaspace.com/definition/american/
I will be using definitions #1 and #3 of this term, which are broadly accepted both within and outside of North America, except for some hate-addled non-entity named Brent Swain, who seems to be vying with Ed Deak for the coveted title of "Most Repetitive Poster of Vive" for 2011. Good luck there, buddy.
I'm anything but "Anti American' I think "America" is two great continents, consisting of 21 great countries ( and one dud). It's that arrogant, no-name country between Canada and Mexico , who's inhabitants are so embarrassed that, when asked where they are from, will only give the name of the continents, which is the problem.
Oh, and do you suppose we should stop calling ourselves "Canadian" as well, given the claim from Quebec nationalists that we unjustly appropriated that name (along with the maple leaf) from their "nation"?
Although I'm sure the Iroquois would have a thing or two to say about the French appropriation of their word for "village", but hey, we're all Africans if you go back far enough.
Oh, and do you suppose we should stop calling ourselves "Canadian" as well, given the claim from Quebec nationalists that we unjustly appropriated that name (along with the maple leaf) from their "nation"?
Although I'm sure the Iroquois would have a thing or two to say about the French appropriation of their word for "village", but hey, we're all Africans if you go back far enough.
Depends on whether or not you believe in the term "by right of conquest".
We couldn't get rid of the Tory majority, but getting rid of Harper would make things entertaining ,as they would quickly return to what Diefenbaker described as the Tory Tradition of "Circle the wagons and shoot inwards. "
Without Harper, the only Reform party member who voted FOR the gun registry, they would scrap a lot more loony gun restrictions than Harper would ever let them do.
Then, they will have served their one useful function , and we can then get rid of them for a long time.
Back to the topic. Why not post the address where we send our complaints to elections Canada ,HERE.
We couldn't get rid of the Tory majority, but getting rid of Harper would make things entertaining ,as they would quickly return to what Diefenbaker described as the Tory Tradition of "Circle the wagons and shoot inwards. "
Without Harper, the only Reform party member who voted FOR the gun registry, they would scrap a lot more loony gun restrictions than Harper would ever let them do.
Then, they will have served their one useful function , and we can then get rid of them for a long time.
Sorry to burst yet another of your bubbles, but the Liberals have taken over that whole "circle the wagons and shoot inwards" idea. Liberals like stealing bad ideas from Red Tories (think wage and price controls and anti-Americanism), which is awfully convenient, since that party is now the default home for Red Tories (think David Orchard). And good riddance to bad statist rubbish, as far as I'm concerned.