badguyThey busted Al Capone on tax laws, not any criminal activity that he was doing.

This article is to further explain this Longley Loophole that 'permits' our party to LEGALLY sell cannabis as medicine

BASIC PREMISE: To avoid this criminal liability, some compassion clubs have been applying for GST and HST tax #, and medical access providers, (like growers), are filing taxes on their income; But, this does not make them legal.

As it was explained to me: a bank robber could apply and get a GST tax number for their business, but it doesn't make it legal, and pay taxes on the revenue, because it's not 'recognized', by any form of government.

- Even DEATH Canada's MMAR program does not sell you marijuana:
- when you look at the document they attach with the delivery, you are actually paying for the paper receipt, and the pot just happens to be there.
It's total hypocrisy, (but that's what this politician is fighting)

in tax law no one can sell anything that does not have a screw # [BAR-CODE] & there is no such thing as a BARyouCODE for a cannabis plant, so it cannot be sold [period]
- Absolutely everything has a BAR-CODE # except pot because the BANKSTERS demand it for purely vexatious reasons [period]
- UNDER this Longley Loophole SCC decision, all we are saying is THAT: we can make a profit by saying that if the GovMINT does not want to create a BAR-CODE then that empowers us at the Marijuana Party of Canada to sell marijuana to protect our belief that this is ridiculous because [quote] we can make a profit by promoting beliefs that the majority in power call wrong or false - no matter how ridiculous that looks at face value - and this is NOT ridiculous - it's the govMINT that's absurd and vexatious
ceasar
NOW under Revenue Canada everything needs to be taxed in order to benefit society, AND under FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION we can 'protect' beliefs the majority in power consider wrong or false and FRANKLY the more ridiculous their argument the more we can protect our beliefs.

- SO, in order to protect our beliefs, all we need to do is be the beneficiary of the tax that is collected AND spend it on benefiting society in order to attract social and political participation and in this way have a shot to get elected - so says the Elections Act and Revenue Canada, [RC]
- BECAUSE they are both based on positive law

So my Catch-22 solution is a PERFECTLY legal means to get recognition for anything that is not being recognized:

In order to do this, I went to Revenue Canada and filed very truthful answers to a GST license application form, <as a EDA Official applying for a GST /HST # > and after arguing with the head man of Revenue Canada, he told me flat out that under RC's regulations, he could not give me a GST or HST #, for a whole series of valid reasons. AND everytime he objected I asked "would you put that in writing? and he said 'NO'

- I'll write a detailed outline on this BUT there's a dozen good reasons why you don't want to lie on this application and everyone of them means they cannot collect taxes and the most obvious question is
"Do you want to pay taxes" - and the only sane answer is "NO"
THEN- he'll ask: "then why are you here?" and you say "I need the rejection" BUT frankly all you need to do is get THEM to keep saying 'no RC will not give you a tax number unless you LIE on this point and then thank him for refusing to collect taxes on your application to pay taxes

- I thanked him, and accepted his offer, because the only way any EDA could quality to pay taxes 'to' Revenue Canada is by LYING on almost every point - which really upset him, because that's not what he wanted to hear.
- Then ask him: Just because he could not collect taxes on my political activity did that mean that we could not collect taxes in order to protect our political activity?
- He refused to answer this and refused to give a letter to confirm that he refused to give me a tax number, because I insisted that he would have had to give me the reason for not giving me a GST number, in writing,
- OTHERWISE under "what is not directly prohibited cannot be implied means we can"
- BECAUSE both the Elections Act and Revenue Canada are 'positive law'

With this GST application rejection, I filed for a ruling

beaverThis document outlines a Notice of Intent on how my federal Marijuana Party EDA can legally sell cannabis as medicine, and I placed them both under a Notice of Understanding and the critical information here is that
- I paid for an Elections Canada and Revenue Canada tax rulings:

Ps: By paying a fee for a ruling, BOTH RC and Elections Canada in law are contractually bound to reply. AND until he does you can carry on like collecting a tax on anything they refuse to, just because he says 'NO'

 Click Here: To read my Revenue Canada /Elections Canada request for a ruling.  
Ps: To be really safe, each EDA should file this form because it's a grass roots movement as opposed to a top-down dictatorial party like all the others
[if you object to any of the wording - then change it - after all it's your EDA]
- On a 1-page doc: I outlined my situation. I asked for a yes or no response to 1-sentence (that only had a yes response), & In order to make this binding,
- IN MY CASE: I thought it wise to sent this 2nd document the next day

As anticipated they did not respond: and

lawyer Legally, when you 'pay' for a ruling and they don't respond means that
- they can't later say that they object or charge me [criminally or civilly] for doing anything in the document.
On the solid ground of our Belief THAT - I was protected by
- "what is not directly prohibited cannot be implied, therefore legal." and I now have documentation to show that Revenue /Elections Canada filed no objection to a Notice of Understanding, therefore they stand-under an agreement

The Conclusion of this ruling is THAT:

1) Under Freedom of Association [DCL]
It's legal for any private individual [Officer] of a Marijuana Party to protect a compassion club to provide cannabis (as medicine, at an arm's length agreement with our EDA) under the Elections Act, [as a PPSA agreement] {Public and Private Service Agreement] as long as its done within a structured private membership compassion club, because a political party has an express guarantee to form a PPSA association that attracts social and political participation, and this guarantee extends to 'protecting' minority beliefs,' under Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Contract as long as it's to the mutual benefit of the Constituent Assembly the EDA Officers and the provider of the service [PROVIDERS: meaning growers and or dispensers who pay benefits]

celt By collecting a tax and paying it to the EDA's pool of operating funds means it's PERFECTLY LEGAL because Revenue Canada refuses to collect it. and under protection of this Longley SCC ruling it's legal for the EDA to benefit /profit from this tax, because, at face value it's the only logical way to protect our beliefs and it clearly meets the criteria of 'no matter how ridiculous this may appear at face value" [period]
IN FACT it's a crime to not collect a tax under RC regulations.
As I've explain in court "If I as an Officer of The Marijuana Party of Canada offered protection to our constituents at arm's length from the Party, and refused to have the Party benefit from this undertaking then it would be a crime of FRAUD" AND the Judge will have to agree that this is a correct legal understanding
- THEN it's legal, as long as the CLUB pays a tax [benefit].because to say otherwise means no political party could collect money [period]

IN REALITY when it's an Officer of the Party who runs the CLUB means it's "the right pocket is paying the left pocket" literally
AND frankly that's exactly what the government is doing with its revenue every day of the week AND all you have to do is be a nice generous fellow with the left pocket with any activity that will benefit the Constituent Assembly .

2] Under Freedom of Expression, of any Party
Authority cannot interfere with the 'activity' of any members who provide a service to any constituent , [in our case] in order to protect medical access rights and the BEST INTEREST of the Constituent's Assembly:

THIS IS NOT AN OCCUPATION [occupations fall under RC regulations]
THIS IS AN ACTIVITY that's protected under Sec-39 CCC DEFENSE WITH CLAIM OF RIGHT, and all members have the right to trespass on Crown's domain in peaceful possession of the Article of our belief AND "What are the Articles of the Marijuana Party?" marijuana and crops , grow op supplies and equipment, including pipes bongs papers, etc

3) Revenue Canada cannot collect taxes on an official party's 'activity', as long as the EDA spends its pool of profit on legitimate political expenses,
AND this is accomplished by promoting any activity to get elected, AND that means being generous with helping any just cause that is mutually beneficial to the constituent assembly
- Rifling money for any unjust causes is a crime [graft for example]

...BOTTOM LINE a lot of what we are doing is protecting yourself with words,that project a semblance of common sense and compliance to laws that are actually there to protect you from prosecution or law suites.

AND frankly the law is nothing but words. and in a Free and Democratic society the most powerful laws are there to protect organized groups from Authority abusing power.
.