Craig Gammie …Master of Half Truths!


Mr. Gammie posted the following comment in response to my posting:

Sauble Land Claim The Gift That Keeps On Giving!

Bruce:

The Saugeen Ojibway First Nation may have filed a lawsuit claiming 66 feet. But they don’t own it. Only if and when the courts say they own it will they own it.

Both SOFN claims are groundless.

Craig Gammie

It is easy to understand, given statements like his, why the Indians say “White man speak with forked tounge!

Craig, the facts are:

The Royal Proclamation of 1736 granted everything north of highway 21, (a line between the mouth of the Potawatomy to the mouth of the Saugeen river and all points north to Tobermory) to the First Nation People. Again, in 1851 the Royal Declaration declared exactly the same.

The Crown agreed to reserve the same for the First nations people.

In 1855 the Natives signed a surrender treaty wherein which the Natives agreed to surrender to the British provided that the land of the Peninsula would be held by the Crown “In Trust” to the benefit of the Natives. The Crown was to build a road from the mouth of the Saugeen to the mouth of the Potawatomy, a one mile strip of land between the two points was allocated for that purpose.

The Crown sold the land in the one mile strip and did not give the funds to the Natives. Further to that, and as part of the Surrender agreement, the road allowances were allocated subsequent to a survey of the said land. As part of that, there was a road allowance decreed encompassing a road along the shoreline around the whole of the Peninsula allowing 66 feet in from the waterline to be paid for when the roads were opened, this never happened either. Further to that the Natives were allocate an 11 kilometer stretch of water out from the shoreline around the entire peninsula. This fact is acknowledged and embrace by the BNA of 1867 and reaffirmed when Trudeau brought it home.

In the Land Claim of 1994 the Natives, have honoured all Crown Patented lands but have demanded the return of the unopened road allowances and payment for the utilized road allowances.

The Natives have take their action out in the Haig at the World Court, as they believe they will not obtain a fair Trial in the Canadian system. Something I believe to be true.

Mr. Gammie states: “Only if and when the courts say they own it will they own it.” Let me think about this for a minute…We as a Country, have agreed to do something, reaffirmed it in the BNA and in our Constitution,  pissed backwards and have said in essence… I know we said we would but you have to prove we said we would in a Court, that we pay the Judges.Oh and by the way we are going to keep all the money until you prove we said it while we argue every little point. “

There are 226 outstanding land Claims in the Province of Ontario today! The Courts and the Government have displayed outright contempt and racism towards the Natives historically. We as a people, represented by our Government have trapped the natives on reserves plundered their land, the same land that we promised to hold for them in trust, stolen any and all benefits from the trust and now we want to go to Court and make them prove that we are not all a bunch of lying thieves before Judges that we pay. Sounds fair to me!!  NOT!

Remember we as a people took two generations of the Native children, placed them in residential schools and brain washed those same children into believing that they were second class scum of the earth then sent them home to their families on reserves that were underfunded and poverty stricken and now we wonder why they are fighting back!

Yes Craig you are a true Politician! Tell everyone what they want to hear, get what you want, then deny everything until it is proven in a court, which you control, that you said it. You really have proven that you should never be elected in my opinion!!!!

Definition of TRUST in Canada

In common law legal systems, a trust is a relationship whereby property is held by one party for the benefit of another. A trust is created by a settlor, who transfers some or all of his or her property to a trustee. The trustee holds that property for the trust’s beneficiaries. Trusts have existed since Roman times and have become one of the most important innovations in property law.[1]

An owner placing property into trust turns over part of his or her bundle of rights to the trustee, separating the property’s legal ownership and control from its equitable ownership and benefits. This may be done for tax reasons or to control the property and its benefits if the settlor is absent, incapacitated, or dead. Trusts are frequently created in wills, defining how money and property will be handled for children or other beneficiaries.

The trustee is given legal title to the trust property, but is obligated to act for the good of the beneficiaries. The trustee may be compensated and have expenses reimbursed, but otherwise must turn over all profits from the trust properties. Trustees who violate this fiduciary duty are self-dealing. Courts can reverse self dealing actions, order profits returned, and impose other sanctions.

The trustee may be either an individual, a company, or a public body. There may be a single trustee or multiple co-trustees.

The trust is governed by the terms under which it was created. In most jurisdictions, this requires a contractual trust agreement or deed.

Say what you are going to do and do what you say you are going to do! Otherwise you are just the lying scum of the earth!

The oath of Office is a promise not a formality!!!!

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Bruce

Advertisements

Time to Review and Score The Answers Provided By Candidates TWSBP! Part 1


Bruce the Blight

Bruce the Blight

 

Now remember I am not a lawyer! I am just a schmuck from the Bruce Peninsula that wonders, so this article is merely my opinion! I have just witnessed 8 years of wasted time and effort and the erosion of our rights as a people.

I find it amusing that the people that are running for election in the Town of South Bruce Peninsula, with the exception of the few, are all hot to trot to get your vote, but not interested in answering any questions.

Now, I may be an opinionated, old redneck, only interested in myself, as some have said, but I have to think, that if I were running for office, I would take advantage of every opportunity to get my message out!

Apparently it is a good thing I am not running as I would be wrong according to the responses, to the questions I posted.

Let us discuss and review the questions asked and answers given to question 1 and 2:

1. Are you prepared to sign and honour the Oath of office and the Oath of Allegiance?

It is mandatory for someone elected to sign the oath of office, which in turn provides an allegiance to Her Majesty. If in fact you swear the oath and allegiance, your are stating you will uphold the honour of the Crown ahead of all else, amongst other things.

I note that every single Candidate that answered the questions said yes to question 1,  with the exception of Craig Gammie! Mr. Gammie said it was “a silly question” implying that it was not worth answering! HMMMM!

Our laws are based on British Common Law, whose foundation is that of the Magna Carta.The Magna Carta was brought into being by the Land Barons, to control the Crown, who at the time, was taxing the people to the extreme, amongst other things negative to property ownership. The Crown had input on this document and it was amended many times by way of agreement between the people and the Crown.

Now this gives rise to question #2:

2. Is it your position that Provincial Regulations pertaining to property use are binding on Private Property?

The wealth and prosperity of this country was built on Property. All the natural resources are part of the land. Agriculture would not be if there was no land to farm nor would there be a forestry industry if there were not rights to the timber growing on the land. By the same token water, minerals, oil and gas etc. are all part of the land. Without Real Property we have nothing but the right to pay taxes!

Canada was built by people coming here to get land ownership. This was encouraged and promoted by the Crown, who provided Land Patents to entice  people to emigrate here. Land ownership was the motivation! Ownership provided security and opportunity. To own land meant you had a future. Most could not even dream of owning property in the old country so they came here for that chance. We have all been lead to believe that ownership was and is security.

In 1792 The Constitution Act was created to divide Canada into 2 separate Provinces, Upper and Lower Canada, which introduced English Law pertaining to “property and Civil Rights”.

“(18)  …..and to introduce English Law as the Rule of Decision in all matters of Controversy, Relative to Property and Civil Rights”

It also supported the Granted and patented private property rights, under section 9:

“(IX) Provided always, that nothing in this act contained shall extend, or be construed, to any lands that have been granted by his Majesty, or shall hereafter be granted by his Majesty, his heirs and successors, to be holden in free and common socage.”

The British North American Act, 1867

The Preamble of the BNA it expresses that our constitution and our country is to have a constitution “similar in Principal to that of the United Kingdom”.

The BNA Section 12 “All Powers, Authorities and functions which under any Act of Parliament of Great Britain, or of the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland or of the Legislature of Upper Canada, Lower Canada, Canada, Nova Scotia or New Brunswick, are at the Union vested in…
The concept of the Union or amalgamation under one superior corporate entity is in fact expressed in the preamble of the BNA.

Since the Provinces is in reality a corporation, created by letters patent, one must look to the meaning of provincial property.

Section 109. All lands, mines, minerals and Royalties belonging to the several Provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick at the union and all sums then due or payable for such lands , mines minerals or Royalties, shall belong to the several Provinces of Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick in which the same are situate or arise, subject to any Trusts existing in respect thereof, and to any interest other than that of the Province in the same.

Section 109 clearly states that the Provinces own the revenue that can be created from public/Crown lands being sold or used to create revenue from the mines and minerals that are reserved in the land patents. Private property is addressed under “subject to any trusts existing in respect thereof and to any interest other than that of the Province in the same.”

The Draft BNA was created at the Quebec Conference in 1864. In the draft was the instruction and the intent of section 109.

56. All lands, mines, minerals and Royalties vested in Her Majesty in the Provinces of Upper Canada, Lower Canada, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Price Edward Island, for the use of such Provinces, shall belong to the Local Government of the Territory in which the same are situate; subject to any trusts that may exist in respect to any of such lands or to any interest other of other persons of the same.

This in fact means that the Province cannot interfere with any other persons “interest” and/or any ”trusts” not of the Province.

“The Queen in right of Ontario has no right, title or interest in and to lands described” (Ontario (Attorney General) v Roundtree Beach Assn., 1994). The Queen/Crown has removed the crown domain through letters patent, ergo there is no authority to be transferred to the Province.

Section 117 “The several provinces shall retain all their respective Public Property not otherwise disposed of in this Act, subject to the Right of Canada to assume any lands or Public Property required for Fortifications or for the Defense of the Country.”

In the case of A.G. v. DeKeyer’s Royal Hotel, 1920, p. 28 it is stated “ Since the Magna Carta the estate of a subject in lands or buildings has been protected against the prerogative of the Crown.”There were provisions that “private Property” could only be used or regulated with fair compensation being paid, even during times of war.”

Since Section 125 of the Act says that Federal property and Provincial property are exempt from taxation, it stands to reason that if we pay taxes on the land we must be owners of the land ergo we must be owners of private property.

The BNA Section 12 “All Powers, Authorities and functions which under any Act of Parliament of Great Britain, or of the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland or of the Legislature of Upper Canada, Lower Canada, Canada, Nova Scotia or New Brunswick, are at the Union vested in…

So now we have Candidates that have agreed to sign their Oaths of Office and Allegiance to the Crown, if they are elected, in doing so they have stated that they will,  in essence, Honour the will of the Crown!

The Crown, has willed in the legislation above, that Private Property is outside the Jurisdictional control of the Province. Therefore if the Candidates intends to honour their oaths then they must answer question 2 with a Definite NO, failing which they are not honouring their oath’s.

To allow the Province to impose regulations that restrict the right of utility of property owners within the Municipality, abrogates their responsibility that they pledged to uphold.

Think about it, we lost Giant Tiger, Canadian Tire (about 100 jobs) and god knows what else when the MTO would not allow  or provide a turning lane on the south end of town on Highway 6. Regardless of what the Province says Highway 6. from Alvanley to Wiarton is within the boundaries of the Town of South Bruce Peninsula. The Province signed off on that in 2004 when they approved our Master Plan. The regulations being imposed by the Province is over stepping their authority and our elected representatives surrendering to the Provinces will is an example of the failure of our elected representatives to protect our interests.

All Candidates said yes to Question 2 with the exception of Turner! So in saying yes, they are in fact telling you that they have no intention of honouring their Oaths but still want you to vote for them! Oh wait, Gammie said “the question is not relevant to a Municipal election!” Hog wash!

How can you as a voter and taxpayer allow someone to represent you when they have, before being elected, lied to you, by not adhering to the oath they have agreed to swear?

If they do not understand the law in place, they have a responsibility to educate themselves with respect to the law. If they are to blatantly disregard their commitment, by giving lip service to the Oath, then they are not capable of representing you in an honest, responsible manner!

It seems that those running in this election, generally have taken the position, that if one of us would fight their battle (their job)with respect to the Province over stepping their authority and win, then they would support the victor. The fact of the matter is that it is their responsibility as an elected official, is to protect you, not the job of the taxpayer to fight their battle, which they pledged to do, in the first place. The ultimate winner is you the taxpayer as your rights as a property owner prevail. If indeed you are happy with the Province dictating what you can or cannot do on your property then why in Gods name are we paying for a Municipal Government.

The only way the Province or the Municipality can control private property is to first purchase it, then regulate it, then sell it with the restrictions registered on title, this in fact is the law. Other than that they have no rights to the property that was not owned by the Province or the Municipality at the time of the Union Act of 1851 or the British North American Act of 1867. These Statutes were and are, the will of the Crown as it was proclaimed in the passing of the legislation.

The reality of the situation is, that if you are running for office, your first responsibility is your allegiance to the Crown, then to the Taxpayers, not the will of a Provincial body interested in protecting their interests ahead of all else. If you cannot understand this you cannot fulfill your obligations sworn too and subsequently cannot in good conscience govern!

We are expected to obey to the letter of the Law, we are entitled under the Charter 15(2) to be treated equally in Law, however how is that possible if in fact the financial costs are so high that the Province can use your tax dollars to fight you in enforcing your rights given by law.

Our Municipal representatives are to protect us with our tax dollars from economic oppression and restrictive controls by the senior levels of government. If they cannot or will not do so then we have no need for Municipal Government or ownership of “Private Property” thus making the efforts of forefathers moot!

Tomorrow I will address from my perspective, the answers of Question 3 and 4 by our Candidates.

Think before you vote!!!

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Bruce

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“HAD”


Unlike most works of personal experience, I have written this script to share with all, a concept that has been forgotten by North America.

 Albeit, this is a rags to riches to rags story of a small town Canadian boy with aspirations of greatness, the true jest of the adventure is deeply rooted in those dreams.

 From the time I was a child I noted that I was different from my peers. I was always the example of what was bad. A non conformist, a radical. I didn’t follow, I chose to be on my own. I enjoyed sports such as skiing and tennis. Needless to say I was not a team player.

  I recall a time when I was very young, my father parked his car in front of the local credit union  and stated “these people and their institutions are nothing short of communists they will destroy this country and the spirit that created it.” I didn’t exactly know what he was talking about then but as long as he was buying the candy I was in support of what ever he had to say. That is until I turned sixteen and he took me to Kincardine, Ontario, some forty mile from home gave ten bucks and told me to get out of the car. “Since you can’t conform to simple rules at home it is time you learned reality!” and then he drove away. I didn’t go home or speak to him for three years.

 This story is about the abuse of the creative in this country by the masses. The collective do-gooders that believe that you and I have an obligation to give onto them without benefit of return in any form. We are obligated to contribute to them what we produce and that if we don’t we are evil and self centered.

 These same people are driven by their own lack of ability to create. They take from those who create under the guise of the benefit of the majority. They never use their own abilities for anything original , but focus upon the creations of others.

 The deeper you go into this concept the more and more you begin to realize that Canada is nothing more than a banana republic that has been united and governed by the few. Canadians in general are a complacent bunch that will put up with just about anything that is thrown at them by the few as long as it doesn’t interfere with the hockey game or their bingo.

 At the time of writing the dollar is worth about sixty cents U.S. , we are taxed at the rate of top end fifty-eight percent and in combined sales taxes and additional fifteen percent in Ontario. For the sake of argument we as Canadians are working for about 25% of what we are really paid. Therefore we receive food clothing and shelter for our efforts, nothing more nothing less. The only real issue is wether you want to live in the lap of luxury or to live modestly and adjust your contribution accordingly.

 The civil serpents of this country implement the programs dreamed up by the folks that are elected by the thirty or so percent that vote. Their campaigns are funded primarily by the party line that are pork barrelled in return. The working stiff is taxed to the point that he can only just survive on what he takes home so that the civil serpents can justify their existence by doling out benefits to those that do not want to contribute themselves as it is easier to receive than to give.

 I firmly believe that what I create with my mind belongs to me and me alone. If I chose to give it to someone that is my choice not my obligation. I do not believe that I have the right to give something away without a return of some form, should I do so I am contributing to the downfall of the receiver. This would be wrong because if you are to receive something without paying something in return,  it is so much simpler to look to places wherein you can obtain more without providing anything in return and as a subsequent you spend your time looking instead of creating as there is no purpose in creating for your creations have no value.

 By the same token the collective have no right to take from me to give to others, for this very action denies me what is mine and contributes to the downfall of society as a whole. The very thought that I should create so as to provide to the collective only promotes the concept of non-production. Why produce anymore than you have to, too survive if anything you produce to the excess is to be taken to be given. There is no point.

 The Turks and Caicos Islands, are an example of creativity at its finest. By providing a domicile exempt from taxation of income,  they provide incentive to create income. Their very existence is in itself an example of creativity. They have no natural resources to speak of but have built an economy on the basis of providing an environment that attracts the creative spirits who want only to keep what is theirs from those that wish to take it and give it away.

 The creators that have taken advantage of the opportunities provided by the Turks are in fact scorned in Canada. They are branded as tax evaders, as greedy by the collective at home. These branders are the  ones that are merely upset by the fact,  that they cannot take because it is out of their reach.

 The creators that have attorned to the Turks as sanctuary are in turn looking to other places to invest their returns as there is no thanks for investing in Canada.. Why provide to the thieves any capital for them steal or support their efforts to steal from the creators that haven’t learned as yet.

  You as an individual must look towards the destruction and misery collective bodies have caused in the name of “the benefit of the many”, I mean ask the Jewish community what benefit they obtained from the collective in Germany. Ask the Japanese of Hiroshima what benefit they obtained. Look to every collective movement in history and you will find example after example of travesties committed by a group of self appointed representatives leading the blind in the name of “the good of man kind as a whole”.

 Man is by nature a creator, the word means “possessor of knowledge”. Since the beginning of time man has lived from his creations. He has developed his ideas and turned them into reality and from that he has made his existence more pleasurable and more fulfilling. Man as an individual can reason and think for himself, he creates something and utilizes his creation as he chooses.

 The collective can accomplish non of this. The collective cannot have an original thought. There is no benefit produced as there is no creation.

 The collective, unite and govern. This by its very nature gives them in their mind the right to take for the benefit of the whole. They actually justify this with the laws they create. This is nothing short of slavery. To take without compensation. To steal the ideas and energy of the individual to benefit the whole is a crime against humanity as a whole.

 To the collective the end justifies the means. What they do not realize is that the creators of today are in fact an endangered species. To eliminate the drive that motivates creativity is to cut off your nose to spite you face. The very force the collective wish to capitalize on is being destroyed by mediocrity and complacency.

 I have lived as an individual and as part of a collective. I chose to live as an individual. I cannot live as part of a collective. For me to support the collective is to die as well as destroy those within the collective itself. It is end without a beginning and a beginning without an end.It is assured self destruction.

  My family has been destroyed by the desire of the collective to control individualism. Their attempt to control individuals through the manipulation of myself and those around me  is nothing more than a medium from which they can control individuals who have left this country in an effort to protect what is rightfully theirs and prevent others from leaving, through scare tactics.

 I shall move on. I shall perhaps move to a place where what is mine is mine. I shall not contribute one thought, one ounce of energy, one moment in time supporting the mindless objectives of the of a collective in any form.  I urge you to think and assist in the abolition of the collective fraud, not for me but for you and yours.

 Take these words as my gift to you. I give them without expectation. They are my creation with which I have the right to do with as I see fit. I chose to share them with you. In return I ask that you share them with others and live by their meaning.

 You never really know or appreciate what you have until such time as it is taken from you or threatened to be taken from you.

 Things in life are only objects to be pondered and enjoyed while they are in your custody here on earth.

 The non material assets possessed by  each and every one of us are the only permanence in this world. These gifts are yours and yours alone, given without expectation for return or without any preconceived motive by their benefactor.

 They are to be enjoyed and treasured regardless of circumstance.

Unfortunately in this society, the focus of most is restricted to the material substance imbedded in our brains from childhood on.

 The forces of this society, insist that you pursue their goals at all cost. They program you into believing that what they say and do is all there is in life. If you are a good person and play their game their way you will be rewarded with material gains and possessions.

 Be wary for they that believe in that concept are being tricked into a life of no value, without true reward.

 The concept of government, I believe, was to compliment the less material by developing an economy conducive to growth and peace of society not of the government.

 We can only have a government as good as we allow not as good as they dictate.

 The only point I want to share is, the currency of life is love, you have an unlimited supply of this particular commodity.

It bears no interest and is not ravished by inflation or controlled by the government. It is not taxed, audited or stolen.

You must give it away unconditionally, without expectation to those you feel are, deserving. It will show unlimited return if you do not expect or demand it.

 To love is divine!

       To be loved is life!!

             To create from love is why we are here!!

The love, respect and support by true friends and family are all there really is. Acknowledge, cherish and  protect at all cost what is truly yours,

 As nothing else is relevant.

John C. Schnurr

Copyright July, 1995

Ramblings of an old man!

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Bruce

Copyright July, 1995