Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Moderator: Burnaby49

Burnaby49
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Posts: 5641
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:45 am
Location: The Evergreen Playground

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby Burnaby49 » Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:05 am

I suspect that Wally's comments about having ex-Crown attorneys and practicing civil litigant lawyers acting for him have to be taken with some skepticism. As Mowe noted the attorney that was so captured by Wally's arguments that he was willing to surrender his professional license for the privilege of acting for him seems to have disappeared. Also Dove's comments about being an ex CRA auditor who saw the light might not stand close scrutiny. He seems to be a local Vancouver area guy but I worked in Vancouver CRA audit for almost 35 years and don't remember him. I watched a video of him droning on (highlight was his vividly dyed orange hair!) and I don't recognize the face. He claimed that he quit because;

So what else do we know about Wally? Well, among other things, Dove claims to be a former auditor of the Canada Revenue Agency, at the time named the Canada Customs Revenue Agency. But he defected, as a “deeply religious man”, given the disturbing things he had witnessed.


However I've known many "deeply religious" people who have had successful careers at the CRA without, as far as I can tell, prostituting their beliefs for Mammon. Maybe, if Wally actually worked for a time with the CRA, he left for other, unspecified reasons apart from his religious convictions and he may have been in for so short a time that he made no impression on anyone. Hardly long enough to have an inventory of horror stories that drove him out.

I don't see anything new or novel in Dove's laundry list of issues that he claims he plans to pursue in court if only he can get a lawyer to act for him for free. Same old, same old.
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs

Steve

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby Steve » Thu Mar 20, 2014 4:47 am

Wally has never won a court case. In fact he claimed his innocence but then plead guilty in Lindsay Ontario court March/April 2012 and agreed to pay a $50,000.00 fine to settle claims by CRA. He claims accepted for value took care of the debt but he did receive notice from a collection agency hired to collect on that outstanding debt. Typical freeman thinking a debt is paid without proof of payment like a receipt; accountancy 101. Wally has never brought information to the table that someone else did not already bring to the table. His concept of work and research is to scan the internet to see what is new that others have brought to the table then speak of it like he has first hand knowledge.

User avatar
Hilfskreuzer Möwe
Northern Raider of Sovereign Commerce
Posts: 873
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 1:23 am
Location: R R R SS Voltaire 47N 31 26W 22 R R R SS Voltaire 47N 31 2 [signal lost]

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby Hilfskreuzer Möwe » Fri Mar 21, 2014 5:46 am

Welcome to Quatloos Steve! Thanks for that information - it certainly matches my observation that Wally is horribly vague when it comes to his "litigation".

You might be amused to watch this video, a recent episode of "Global F.A.C.T. Radio" (http://www.blogtalkradio.com/globalfact ... gal-action), where the host is baffled and complains about how Wally's Human Rights Defenders League in Canada is fighting over who owns the HRDLC lawsuits, Wally or another woman who runs the "Natural Congregation of Yahweh" (http://www.naturalgod.com/).

It says a lot about these folks that they are battling over who runs frivolous litigation and potential subscribers.

SMS Möwe
That’s you and your crew, Mr. Hilfskreuzer. You’re just like a vampire, you must feel quite good about while the blood is dripping down from your lips onto the page or the typing, uhm keyboard there... [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNMoUnUiDqg at 11:25]

Steve

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby Steve » Sat Mar 22, 2014 7:50 pm

Wally has no clue who the lawyer is/was that is/was allegedly going to manage the court case against the government and banks......The guy who claims to know said lawyer has made claims in the past that were found to be based on hollow promises - but he made lots of money. In short, the existence of said lawyer has never been proved and Wally knows it. Time will tell but I think he has been duped.

User avatar
Hilfskreuzer Möwe
Northern Raider of Sovereign Commerce
Posts: 873
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 1:23 am
Location: R R R SS Voltaire 47N 31 26W 22 R R R SS Voltaire 47N 31 2 [signal lost]

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby Hilfskreuzer Möwe » Sun Mar 23, 2014 4:36 pm

Steve wrote:Wally has no clue who the lawyer is/was that is/was allegedly going to manage the court case against the government and banks. ... In short, the existence of said lawyer has never been proved and Wally knows it. Time will tell but I think he has been duped.


This would not surprise me - it's quite amazing how often folks like Wally, who try to present themselves as authorities, have only "heard about some case where [x] happened" or "was told that [y] worked" - and then expect the masses to sign on.

Incidentally, I found this recording of Wally - he reveals the truth about the CRA and how its employees take such great pleasure in driving the innocent to suicide, etc. Pretty melodramatic stuff. Then he switches to a lengthy (and long debunked) argument on how Canada is unauthorized and income tax is illegal.


I think the original material is quite old and was then recently repacked into the Youtube video. It speaks of the "CCRA", whose name changed to the CRA about a decade ago, quotes Eldon Warman (who does that anymore?!), and then instructs interested persons go to "www.pqionline.cc" for more information.

I'd never heard that link before, and there's nothing there now, but I see Quatloos has already profiled this source - Pinnacle Quest Online (http://www.quatloos.com/pinnacle_quest2.htm).

Wally really has been at this for awhile...

SMS Möwe
That’s you and your crew, Mr. Hilfskreuzer. You’re just like a vampire, you must feel quite good about while the blood is dripping down from your lips onto the page or the typing, uhm keyboard there... [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNMoUnUiDqg at 11:25]

User avatar
Hilfskreuzer Möwe
Northern Raider of Sovereign Commerce
Posts: 873
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 1:23 am
Location: R R R SS Voltaire 47N 31 26W 22 R R R SS Voltaire 47N 31 2 [signal lost]

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby Hilfskreuzer Möwe » Mon May 19, 2014 5:40 pm

Thought I’d pop in on Wally Dove and the Human Rights Defenders League In Canada to see what they’re up to. First, an administrative note – it seemed for quite some time that Kent Barrett (http://www.facebook.com/kent.barrett) was a significant figure in that movement, but he seems now to have shifted over to Scott Duncan’s camp. Scott Is Always Right!

The HRDLC class action lawsuit (http://humanrightsdefendersleague.ca/our-legal-action/) appears to have gone absolutely nowhere – the mysterious lawyer is still threatening “… to hand in his bar card(s) …” - but now instead of one lawsuit, Wally & Co. seem to think there might be numerous lawsuits ahead:

Civil Litigations

It is not yet entirely clear to us, exactly how many civil litigations may be required in order for us to accomplish our objectives. For example, we know that Action(s) will be required against the Federal government respecting the offence of private money ownership via the Bank Act, and the offence of privatizing of national assets via another Act or Acts, all or some of which may enjoin various Ministries. We also know we will be required in each province and territory to take Actions regarding the offence of denying private property ownership and protection of subsisting Crown Grants via the Land Titles Acts, and of course, Actions against the various Ministries, probably both provincial and federal, regarding the offence of the fraudulent creation and attachment of the registered names. All of the above institutions or agencies serve in one way or another to enact and enforce statutes and by-laws that abrogate our fundamental natural human rights, contrary to the superior laws of the nation and the international treaties.

Provincial and Federal Actions

Now concurrent with all of the above, we will be taking action against each of the various provincial and federal law societies, the BAR associations and the appropriate Ministries of Justice, as the members of these organizations are complicit with the activities of the aforementioned institutions and agencies. These court actions are designed to utilize the tools built into the system itself, to actually cause foundational and permanent change to that system, as it was originally designed to be. The result will be our freedom from the enslavement of the banker dominated money system, and to have a government that will be our servant and not our master, taking instructions from us, and not from the bankers. As Canadians, we are being [criminally] deprived of our Patrimonial Entitlements, that being our right to freely enjoy our fair share of the natural wealth and resources of our nation, and therefore we are not only entitled, but we are morally obligated to take action aimed at stopping that deprivation. That is what our process is all about.


I’m sure they’ll figure it out.

Another new feature on the website is for the HRDLC users to report their negative interactions with the CRA and banks (http://humanrightsdefendersleague.ca/cr ... r-stories/). You see, this happens a lot:

It goes without saying that as being a transparent advocate for the people of Canada we get to hear a lot of horror stories when it comes to our dealing with government agencies like the Canada Revenue Agency and monolithic banking corporations.

The problem is that for the most part the people we can share our stories, and have them care, are few and far between. Well here at Human Rights Defenders League we want to hear your stories and with your permission we also want to share those stories with people who do care and so you can see you are not alone.


But apparently things must have greatly improved of since the HRDLC put this mechanism in place because in total there are zero of these “Horror Stories” posted to the HRDLC website. Good for you, CRA! Glad you cleaned up your act! (Or maybe no one is visiting Wally’s website …)

But, thankfully Wally & Co. have not been entirely inactive. One new focus is an outreach to Newfoundland fishermen. For those not familiar with the state of fisheries in Canada, this was a traditional mainstay of the Newfoundland economy, but in the 1980 onward a crash in fish stocks due to overfishing much reduced that activity, and led to close government management. Well, the HRDLC has produced a nifty little 17 page pamphlet (http://humanrightsdefendersleague.ca/?ddownload=2506) that explains how fisheries legislation only applies to a person (a.k.a. the Infamous Strawman) and you can opt of having a person using the usual HRDLC techniques.

I wonder if we’ll see any litigation based on that scheme? My guess is no. HRDLC doesn’t seem to have many subscribers, and most Newfies have a little more common sense than that. With the occasional exception (viewtopic.php?f=48&t=9593) like Amy Collins, and I think she’s quit the HRDLC too and also shifted to Scott Duncan. Seems to be a pattern here …

Last, HDRLC is offering “Provincial Letters of Complaint” (http://humanrightsdefendersleague.ca/no ... complaint/). These are entirely new documents which you can download, personalize, and send to your local Law Society, and various Attorney Generals, who are identified like this: “a man, Sometimes acting as Attorney General of Canada”.

I’ll reproduce one (styling is in the original) for fun.

RE: NOTICE FOR CORRECTIVE OR DISCIPLINARY MEASURES

Members of the Law Society have, either wittingly or unwittingly, created a (legal) system of enslavement and theft under which the people have been beguiled into a life of slavery. We ask that you investigate and take corrective or disciplinary action as appropriate.

No Act or Statute or Governmental Policy or Guideline is written, reviewed and enforced unless done by a member of the Law Society. In other words, the legal system is created by lawyers, as is any type of governance, be it banking or political.

It is the inherent duty of government to supply the money to the people in order that they may create and freely exchange their goods and services. The government's failure to do so, is a breach of trust whether done wittingly or unwittingly. The present-day system reflects this failure.

Worse, the delegation/transfer of this duty to a private for-profit group of bankers is unconstitutional and in contempt of the Supreme Court of Canada's ruling in Nova Scotia (Attorney General) v. Canada (Attorney General) [1951], S.C.R. 31. This exploit has been facilitated by the members of the Law Society.

Because of this breach of trust, the people are left with no alternative but to borrow money they need from private bankers, at interest, and consequently find themselves in a permanent state of debt bondage, slavery or servitude (see Article 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights), and living in a permanent state of hopelessness.

In fact, the government is contributing directly to this enslavement of the people by borrowing, at interest, from these same private bankers and holding the people as surety for the national debt, through the ancient system of pledging, effected and perpetuated by the birth registration process.

To correct this situation, the government must either start supplying the money to their legal entity, the registered legal name, or accept the responsibility of paying all the financial debts and obligations under the registered legal name appearing on the said birth certificate (“BC”), the title to which is held by the government, making government the responsible party (principal).

The current system of commerce is patterned after the game of Monopoly and was created by lawyers, who write, interpret, enforce, and judge the law (Rules of the game/Acts & Statutes), on behalf of the private bankers, through government(s), to facilitate the enslavement of the people and the theft of the people's natural and created wealth.

There are two simultaneous systems at play in our country today.

The first we refer to as “fact”. This is where human beings are all created free and equal in dignity and rights under God (or whatever we may call our Creator), with dominion over the earth and all things of it (humanity's birthright).

The second is effectively a mirror image of the “fact”, and is cognizable by its fictional nature, which we refer to as the fictional system of commerce (“rule of law”). This is where human beings take on (compelled by law), or play, any number of the fictional characters that exist therein, such as person , client, Police Officer, Member of Parliament, Lawyer, Judge, etc.

When a human being attends at a lawyer's office to engage his/her legal services, it is the human being that attends but the lawyer assumes the human being is playing one or more of the aforementioned fictional characters available to him/her (person). This is the problem!

If the lawyer does not divulge the truth to the human being, that he/she is not the client, that the person/registered legal name is the client, then the lawyer has assisted in the enslavement of, and theft from, the human being. This is the distinction between “fact” and “rule of law”.

It is common knowledge, or it certainly ought to be, among lawyers, that all Acts and Statutes apply only to persons and not human beings (men and women).

Further, it is every human being's right to choose to be recognized as a person before the law, OR NOT (see Article 6 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights). Infringement of this right is Extortion (see R v. Davis, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 759).

No human being can be forced to play one of the fictional characters in the fictional system of commerce as established by lawyers for the sole purpose, we submit, of enslaving humanity and stealing all their natural and created wealth for the ultimate benefit of the private bankers, both domestic and international.

We submit, this is negligent misrepresentation of the truth to human beings for the sole purpose of bringing the human being into debt bondage as a fictional character known, in law, as a person.

The ultimate purpose of this misrepresentation is to obtain the execution of valuable securities (Court Orders for money) and placing that burden upon the human being. This is fraudulent and invokes Section 363 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

In fact, this amounts to the negligent misrepresentation of human beings as a client, as property, as debtor, and the unlawful pledging of human beings as security for the debt of another (debt bondage). It is an act committed by all lawyers including those playing the fictional character of judges in all Canadian Courts.

The registered legal name, which existence is certified by the birth certificate (“BC”), contains the names of the principals (responsible parties), CANADA and the province of birth, such as ONTARIO. Our (human beings) signatures do not appear on the “BC” and we are not, therefore, a party (principal).

The best evidence of title in the registered legal name (the Statement of Birth) is archived with the government which means, we submit, that the government is the holder of the legal title in the registered legal names and by extension, the legal owner of all property registered in those registered legal names.

Consequently, LEGALLY the people are chattel and used (hypothecated) as surety for the debt of another, the government. This is done, without the knowledge and consent of the people and is, by definition, slavery, which is a crime against humanity.

The Crown and members of the Law Society, collectively and individually, are misrepresenting the facts. This truth (“fact”) being, all legal claims and obligations requiring the payment of money are the responsibility of the issuer of the “BC” AND HOLDER OF LEGAL TITLE IN THE REGISTERED LEGAL NAME, not the human beings.

This lack of disclosure amounts to misrepresentation, malpractice, mistake, fraud, or negligence.

Respectfully, all of this results in the passing off of debt and other liabilities to human beings (men and women), and is one, if not the sole, cause of loss of enjoyment of life for humanity and damage to the public.

The violation of an Act or Statute is not a wrong committed by any human being (man or woman).

It is respectfully submitted that, because of the foregoing, amongst other things, the Law Society is guilty of dereliction of duty, and the Attorney's General are grossly negligent in the performance of their duties.

The bottom line is that men and women do not belong in this system and when they are duped or otherwise tricked into being a part of it, that makes out fraud. This requires corrective action by members of the Law Society.

Thank you for your assistance in these matters and I look forward to your response.

by, i, a man, john doe
for, Human Rights Defender (Declaration on Human Rights Defenders; UN Resolution, A/Res/53/144, 8 March 1999)
Human Rights Defenders League in Canada
[insert your address here]


Well, that correlates well with Wally's "Federal and Provincial" lawsuits mentioned above. Frankly, I'm a little confused why Wally doesn't just do this himself. All he has to do is retain a lawyer, demand legal proof of The Strawman, and when the lawyer pulls out Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571, then Wally can file a lawsuit in negligence - or perhaps even conspiracy! Seems straight forward enough. Don't need a class action for that, nor a de-BAR-carded representative.

Hopefully that alternative will occur to Mr. Dove. In the meantime? Excelsior!

SMS Möwe
That’s you and your crew, Mr. Hilfskreuzer. You’re just like a vampire, you must feel quite good about while the blood is dripping down from your lips onto the page or the typing, uhm keyboard there... [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNMoUnUiDqg at 11:25]

User avatar
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 10644
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:17 pm

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby notorial dissent » Mon May 19, 2014 6:06 pm

Gack, what dreck. Even more convoluted and non-sensual than usual.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

Burnaby49
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Posts: 5641
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:45 am
Location: The Evergreen Playground

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby Burnaby49 » Mon May 19, 2014 6:23 pm

Wally's arguments are no different than the ones that :charles "just call me Charlie"-norman: holmes use in his Supreme Court of British Columbia lawsuit against the federal government of Canada and the provincial government of British Columbia to get them to fork over the $100,000,000 or so they owed him.

viewtopic.php?f=48&t=9683

At least Charlie actually went to court and gave it his best shot, as incoherent as that shot may have been. Wally seems afraid to step up to bat, maybe he likes the status of a theoretical guru too much to risk changing it to that of a failed and discredited litigant.
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs

Burnaby49
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Posts: 5641
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:45 am
Location: The Evergreen Playground

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby Burnaby49 » Tue Jan 27, 2015 1:47 am

Burnaby49 wrote:Ms. Piersanti wasn't happy about losing at Tax Court and has appealed to the Federal Court of Appeal. As I said about the similar case involving Dolores Romanuk she has no chance at the FCA. This is an issue that has already been beaten to death at court. Canadian courts have confirmed, numerous times, that evidence gathered for criminal prosecutions can be used in civil issues.


Ms. Piersanti has lost at the Fedral Court of Appeal but she persists. She's filed Leave to Appeal at the Supreme Court of Canada. Since the Tax Court and Federal Court of Appeals decisions were obviously correct the SCC won't accept it.
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs

Burnaby49
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Posts: 5641
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:45 am
Location: The Evergreen Playground

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby Burnaby49 » Fri Apr 17, 2015 1:34 am

I said in my last post that Ms. Piersanti's appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada was doomed because both courts that have heard her complaint, the Tax Court of Canada and the Federal Court of Appeals, made what was clearly and obviously the right decision, that information collected in the course of the CRA's criminal investigation against her could be used to determine her income tax liability.

The Supreme Court refused her Leave to Appeal today so that is the end of her demented attempts to get the courts to go against the clear wording of the income tax act and overwhelming precedence, some from the Supreme Court itself.

The Supreme Court is pumping out a lot of decisions relevant to Quatloos in this session. We just finished reviewing the new minimum sentence decision on the Dean Clifford discussion, we have this one even if it is just a refusal to accept, and I'm going to post a new discussion about a 600 pound conman that resulted in yet another new Supreme Court decision.
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs

User avatar
bmxninja357
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1013
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 7:46 am

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby bmxninja357 » Fri Apr 17, 2015 1:48 am

I'm going to post a new discussion about a 600 pound conman that resulted in yet another new Supreme Court decision.


does the case rest on the buffet closing thus making the claim, "all you can eat for $14.95" false and misleading? is 'big buffet' running wild on the common large gourmet framed man?

lol. sorry. couldnt resist.

peace,
ninj
whoever said laughter is the best medicine never had gonorrhea....

Burnaby49
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Posts: 5641
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:45 am
Location: The Evergreen Playground

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby Burnaby49 » Fri Apr 17, 2015 2:04 am

bmxninja357 wrote:
I'm going to post a new discussion about a 600 pound conman that resulted in yet another new Supreme Court decision.


does the case rest on the buffet closing thus making the claim, "all you can eat for $14.95" false and misleading? is 'big buffet' running wild on the common large gourmet framed man?

lol. sorry. couldnt resist.

peace,
ninj


Here is a picture of our boy living high on the hog in his salad days. Not that salad appears to have constituted a significant portion of his diet. If you can believe it he is on the run, current location unknown.

Image
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs

Burnaby49
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Posts: 5641
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:45 am
Location: The Evergreen Playground

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby Burnaby49 » Thu Oct 15, 2015 6:44 am

A new and exciting update for Wally Dove. Very quick backstory for readers who don't want to trudge through this discussion. Wally is an ex-Canada Revenue Agency auditor who suddenly saw the light and realized that the Canadian Income Tax act is illegal. So he quit and found greener pastures promoting a software tax deduction scheme. In 2004 he was charged with tax evasion, conspiracy to evade taxes, and false partnership claims but got off because of excessive delay in going to trial. One of his arguments at the time was that he could not be charged with income tax evasion because there was no Income Tax Act so no tax laws were violated.

But Wally wasn't giving up on a good argument and, as Mowe posted;

So, now living free and easy, would Wally make his life afresh and anew? Well, not really. First Wally hooks up with David-Kevin: Lindsay, and in R. v. Maleki, 2006 ONCJ 401 (http://canlii.ca/t/1pwgv) provides affidavit evidence on the non-existence of the Income Tax Act. Yep, basically the same argument. Still doesn’t work.


But Wally had the bit in his teeth and, when you get down to it, what else is he going to do? Get a job where half his income is stolen by illegal taxes? So he thinks up schemes and plans a class action. As Mowe explained it;

A court action to determine who owns and is legally responsible for the legal name that appears on a birth certificate.

Wally explains “what is going on in the system” so as to “deal with the system and its agents and governments”.

- A birth certificate has a registered legal name.
- The legal name is a Crown agency – at least in Ontario.
- Suing a legal name is actually suing the Queen – and that’s treason!
- Government use of that name to identify the human being, that is an improper use of the birth certificate that is contrary to Ontario Vital Statistics Act, s. 531.1(1).
- A birth certificate cannot legally be used as identification.
- Wally has heard (second hand) that a guy facing a CRA criminal litigation complained about misuse of his name this way – and the CRA dropped the case! Wally “talked to the guy who knows the guy who did it.”
- You have a human right to be recognized “as a person before the law”. And you can waive a right – so that means you can waive being a person. If you’re not permitted to do that? That’s extortion – Criminal Code, s. 346. See R. v. Davis.
- So if the CRA goes after you, and you waive your personhood, that’s extortion and illegal.
- An income tax assessment is a security (under the Criminal Code), with the value in the amount owing. The same is true of court orders.
- Since you don’t sign a birth certificate, you are not a party to the birth certificate. The parties who are named are “Ontario”, “Canada” – see the officials' signatures – but since you carry around a birth certificate you are an employee or manager or trustee of the birth certificate – but any attempt to collect from the person named on the birth certificate, the trustee, that is a criminal offence: Criminal Code, s. 363 – obtaining a valuable security by fraud!
- Unknowingly we are tricked into underwriting the birth certificate, but it was originally intended that the Queen would own all property and labour associated with the legal name – that’s because the Queen owns all legal names. In that context we are trespassers against the Queen when we use our own (so called) names.
- “A fiction cannot deal with a human being, and can’t stand over a human being.” The legal name is a fiction – a person – created so the government could interact with human beings, but instead this has been misused.
- No one has authority over us without our consent, but by taking on that birth certificate name, that permits the state to get us.
- Wally talked on the phone to someone who said in court “I’m not going to underwrite this social insurance number” and immediately the legal action was terminated!


It's not as if Wally doesn't have proof to back his bluster. How can you contest this;

- Wally has heard (second hand) that a guy facing a CRA criminal litigation complained about misuse of his name this way – and the CRA dropped the case! Wally “talked to the guy who knows the guy who did it.”


That's money in the bank. Anyhow Mowe ended with this;

Wouldn't it be nice if Wally himself went to court to test out these things, instead of recruiting others to be his guinea pigs? Hmm. Wonder why he doesn't do that.


And I later posted;

At least Charlie actually went to court and gave it his best shot, as incoherent as that shot may have been. Wally seems afraid to step up to bat, maybe he likes the status of a theoretical guru too much to risk changing it to that of a failed and discredited litigant.


Well Wally has finally stepped up to bat and gone to court on his own behalf. And he won! Well he didn't really lose so that must count for something. To be more exact in my terminology Wally and a bunch of other like-minded people took their arguments to the Federal Court of Canada and did not actually lose there because their actions were struck without leave to amend by a prothonotary before they even got into an actual court with a judge.

Bursey v. Canada, 2015 FC 1126
http://canlii.ca/t/gll07

Prothonotary Kevin R. Aalto doesn't seem in the best of moods right off the bat, getting down and dirty right in the first two paragraphs;

[1] In Meads v Meads, 2012 ABQB 571 (CanLII), Associate Chief Justice Rooke of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench wrote at length about a group of litigants to which he gave the name “Organised Pseudo-Legal Commercial Argument (OPCA)” litigants. OPCA litigants follow a now well-known path of illogic, presumption, and pseudo-legal rants. In the course of his very lengthy decision in Meads, Associate Chief Justice Rooke describes in great detail the approaches of OPCA litigants and the similarities which they have in the many court actions which have been brought. These actions fall into this category and the Plaintiffs are quintessential OPCA litigants.

[2] These five cases all engage the approaches described by Associate Chief Justice Rooke. That is, these Plaintiffs endeavour to build a cause of action based on snippets and fragments of international treaties, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom, various Supreme Court of Canada cases and miscellaneous statutes, both federal and provincial. All of these are bound together in pseudo-legal verbiage.


Not starting out well for Wally. Well maybe it gets better;

[4] In a rambling discourse, Dove began by saying that the claims seek the “administration of justice” and to that end he provided to the Court and to counsel for the Defendant a document entitled “Quotes from our Pleadings, etc.” The Court received the document but ignored the last several pages which dealt with evidence respecting a damage claim. Notably, not only do all the statements of claim begin with a reference to Section 24(2) of the Charter and the administration of justice, so did the document provided to the Court. The quotation found in paragraph 1 is attributed to “the Honorable Gerard Mitchell of the Supreme Court of Canada”, which then sets out what appears to be a quotation from some case or other but there is no indication of what case. It is to be observed that the quotation refers to Justice Le Dain of the Supreme Court of Canada and the quotation refers to the administration of justice. It should also be noted that there is no judge by the name of Gerard Mitchell currently on the Supreme Court of Canada nor has there been at any time since the creation of the Supreme Court of Canada.

[5] Apart from the request for the “administration of justice”, Dove then launched into a convoluted explanation of wrongs that he said were central to these cases. The wrongs which create the alleged causes of action include: 1) the actions of Canada Revenue Agency in enforcing the Income Tax Act which actions are argued to be invalid because the Income Tax Act was never “enabled” and is therefore void and of no effect; 2) that there is a debt obligation owed to Dove and the other Plaintiffs by virtue of security which they each allege arises from the registration of their birth (more will be said about this later); 3) as a “human being” each of the Plaintiffs’ unlimited rights and freedoms have been infringed; 4) they have been arbitrarily dealt with and prosecuted pursuant to various statues which are of no force or effect such as the Income Tax Act; and, 5) fraud or mistake by virtue of the actions of government officials arising from enforcement of various statutes. These alleged causes of action are of the same cut of cloth of standard OPCA litigant claims. They are entirely without merit and notwithstanding Dove’s earnest belief that they amount to causes of action they are not and are entirely bereft of any chance of success.


Nope.

Sounds like Aalto got cranky after being cited a snippet from an unidentified Supreme Court of Canada decision attributed to a totally fictitious Supreme Court judge. With a total lack of respect for the plaintiff's efforts and the legal research that Wally had slaved at for years to perfect his case the prothonotary called their submissions "examples of the pseudo-legal drivel which informs much of the content of the statements of claim."

Wally had tried the same argument that Bernie Yankson and Charles Norman Holmes previously tried and totally failed at; that they had secret government birth bonds and they wanted their money.

http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=9597
http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=9683

[6] Of particular note is the claim that their birth registration and the form of document created to show a live birth is somehow equivalent to “security” as defined in the Bank Act. They then argue that their birth registration is a document which fits within the definitions of security found in the Bank Act and creates a debt to the Plaintiffs which they want paid Dove suggested the money to pay would come from realizations on the minerals and natural resources of Canada. This, in turn, gives rise to a payment in the millions to the Plaintiffs from the Consolidated Revenue Fund (the money for nothing argument as described in Meads).


Well no point in prolonging the agony, on to the kill;

[8] It is apparent not only from Dove’s submissions, the statements of claim and the document referred to by Dove that the claims relate to dissatisfaction by the Plaintiffs with government process arising from legislation. In both of the Dove actions it relates to issues involving the enforcement of the payment of income tax. With respect to Michael Bursey it relates to actions taken under the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter O.36, and a warrant that was alleged to have been forged in the name of Her Majesty the Queen as well as the Income Tax Act. With respect to Glenn Bursey it is once again the Income Tax Act and various issues relating to enforcement in the provincial family courts.

[9] In his submissions, Dove requested that the Court grant leave to amend if these statements of claim did not comply with the Rules of the Court. The notices of motion of the Defendant seek to strike without leave to amend. Leave to amend should only be granted where a defect in a pleading can be cured by amendment [see Simon v Canada, 2011 FCA 6 (CanLII) and Collins v AGC, 2011 FCA 140 (CanLII)]. There is nothing in any of these statements of claim that meet the test for leave to amend as there is nothing that can be cured. None of the statements of claim raise any cause of action and are bereft of any chance of success [see, Hunt v Carey, 1990 CanLII 90 (SCC), [1990] 2 SCR 959]. They plead no material facts to support any recognizable cause of action and are scandalous, frivolous and vexatious.

[10] All of these actions are struck without leave to amend. In each case the Defendant has sought costs. It is appropriate that costs be awarded in favour of the Defendant. Five motions to strike were necessary but they were all heard together at one hearing. Therefore, an appropriate level of costs for these motions is $500 per action in favour of the Defendant inclusive of HST.


This is the second time today that I've written up Federal Court decisions made by a prothonotary to save the actual judges from wasting their time on this garbage;

http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=10819
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs

ArthurWankspittle
Slavering Minister of Auto-erotic Insinuation
Posts: 2662
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:35 am
Location: Quatloos Immigration Control

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby ArthurWankspittle » Thu Oct 15, 2015 9:57 am

All of these actions are struck without leave to amend.
Owch! "You outta here!"
Going to Tibet now and deleting Facebook you have my email address

pigpot
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 546
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2015 8:49 am

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby pigpot » Thu Oct 15, 2015 10:25 am

Hilfskreuzer Möwe wrote:[7] I am satisfied the Income Tax Act is a lawfully passed and constitutionally valid statute of Canada.


So that is it because he said so?
Boaz. It's a little like Shazam. It certainly meant a lot to Billy Batson.
Nothing in this post is legal or lawful advice, it is only used for the sake of entertainment.
All "rights" are reserved by this poster.

Burnaby49
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Posts: 5641
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:45 am
Location: The Evergreen Playground

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby Burnaby49 » Wed Nov 11, 2015 8:59 am

Wally and his merry men have become poster boys in this article on vexatious lawsuits;

http://www.lawtimesnews.com/201511095046/headline-news/courts-taking-a-harder-line-on-vexatious-lawsuits

The article relates to

Rule 2.1 General Powers to Stay or Dismiss if Vexatious, etc.

Stay, Dismissal of frivolous, vexatious, abusive Proceeding

Order to Stay, Dismiss Proceeding


2.1.01 (1) The court may, on its own initiative, stay or dismiss a proceeding if the proceeding appears on its face to be frivolous or vexatious or otherwise an abuse of the process of the court. O. Reg. 43/14, s. 1.


The change from normal procedure is that, in the past, one of the parties had to request the court to declare the proceedings vexatious or frivolous. Now the court can pull the plug on it's own initiative. This is what the article has to say about Wally;

“The courts are definitely taking a harder line,” says Michael Myers of Papazian Heisey Myers in Toronto.
“Absent Rule 2.01, you could have serious and lengthy proceedings to deal with non-serious cases and arguments.”

Evidencing the harder line is a recent decision of the Federal Court, Bursey v. Canada. Using no uncertain language, prothonotary Kevin Aalto struck five actions that he described as “pseudo-legal drivel.”

The plaintiffs were “quintessential OPCA litigants,” he wrote, referring to a term — organized pseudo-legal commercial argument litigants — coined by the courts.

“OPCA litigants follow a now well-known path of illogic, presumption and pseudo-legal rants. [They] endeavour to build a cause of action based on snippets and fragments of international treaties, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom, various Supreme Court of Canada cases and miscellaneous statutes, both federal and provincial. All of these are bound together in pseudo-legal verbiage.”

Myers, the lawyer, believes Bursey and similar cases are sending a clear message.

“The way the law is going in Canada, nobody is going to get anywhere with this kind of approach to litigation,” he says.

Still, he notes his concern that Aalto awarded only $500 in costs against the plaintiffs in each action.

“Walking to and from court from my office costs $500,” he says. “Until the courts make OPCA and other frivolous litigants pay through the nose, they’re going to keep trying no matter how the law develops.”


In other news it looks like Wally and the gang are pushing hard on an appeal of the prothonotary's order. A flurry of activity on their Federal Court file;

http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.gc.ca/IndexingQueries/infp_RE_info_e.php?court_no=T-1287-15&select_court=T
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs

Burnaby49
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Posts: 5641
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:45 am
Location: The Evergreen Playground

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby Burnaby49 » Tue Nov 17, 2015 11:39 pm

I've checked Wally Dove's Federal Court file and I think we'll soon have a rich vein of stupid to mine. Wally & Co managed to get their actions consolidated, and it looks like their appeal is being heard today. However I wish the court would make its mind up if Wally sent a Bill of Equity or a Bill in Equity. Not that it really matters; I have no idea what either is supposed to be.


- 2015-11-17 Toronto Oral directions received from the Court: The Honourable Mr. Justice Campbell dated 16-NOV-2015 directing that Accept the Bill of Equity submitted by the Plaintiff. placed on file on 17-NOV-2015

- 2015-11-16 Toronto Bill in Equity received on 16-NOV-2015
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs

nebuer
Swabby
Swabby
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 11:05 pm

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby nebuer » Fri Nov 27, 2015 8:42 pm

"Prothonotary"? Until I read this properly, I thought that was just another OPCA scam word. It does sound like an unfortunate title - must attract some of these types like flies.

Burnaby49
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Posts: 5641
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:45 am
Location: The Evergreen Playground

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby Burnaby49 » Fri Nov 27, 2015 9:28 pm

nebuer wrote:"Prothonotary"? Until I read this properly, I thought that was just another OPCA scam word. It does sound like an unfortunate title - must attract some of these types like flies.


A prothonotary functions as a gatekeeper at the Federal Court of Canada. He's not a judge but can make decisions whether or not a case proceeds. Apart from deciding on the small stuff he screens out the crap to save the court from wasting its time on hopeless actions. Most of the Freeman stuff that I review from Federal Court has been heard and decided by a prothonotary, generally striking claims for having no basis in law for the court to review. A prothonotary's decision can be appealed to the Federal Court for a hearing by a judge.

Canada

Federal Court

In the Federal Court in Canada, the prothonotary is not a clerk, but instead is a judicial officer appointed under the Federal Courts Act and exercises many of the powers and functions of a Federal Court judge. The prothonotary's authority includes mediation, case management, practice motions (including those that may result in a final disposition of the case, regardless of the amount in issue), as well as trials of actions in which up to $50,000 is claimed (see Rules 50, 382, and 383 to 387 of the Federal Courts Rules). The current members of the court are found at Prothonotaries.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prothonotary
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs

nebuer
Swabby
Swabby
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 11:05 pm

Re: Wally Dove - from CCRA toady to Human Rights Defender

Postby nebuer » Fri Nov 27, 2015 9:57 pm

Thanks for the explanation. Sounds like a pretty awful job in a kind of way, but I guess most Lawyers spend the majority of their time dealing with dull cases. :-S


Return to “Canada”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 1 guest