Oct 3rd, 2013 LETTER OF ENGAGEMENT WITH THE CEO OF ELECTIONS CANADA

Forwarded TWIMC and Marc Mayrand

This following passage was taken from the original letter of engagement with the Lieutenant Governor Judith Gichon of August 26th,. Due to this letter, she engaged her AG to act. And since then I've been filing a Millennium trust challenge thru a Pier trust and Pure trust, and this is soon coming to a head PREAMBLE: in law HC and the AG can continue to act like corporations and be abusive to anyone who 'agrees to be governed' under their new MMPR program and they can prosecute and shut down anyone who objects to be governed under the MMPR rules, because we are all governed under the archetypal form called The Supremacy of Parliament where like Henry VIII, the Harpster, and all those acting under his AG are immune from prosecution [under Sec 126 CC] in order to protect and preserve the ponzi scheme called the Sovereign's interest AND frankly [minor edit] <one good way to redress this disparaging situation is to become Party Whip and in this way [after Sept 1st] it's now a punishable crime of state for any AG to just obstruct the implementation of our BC-MMAR trust.> 1. In law. [after this Sept 1st UCC shredding of immunity] every one in power loses immunity from prosecution under UCC rules and frankly that means that some 'body' is being empowered with 'enforcing' this change of UCC status, and frankly as i see it that means that all kinds of old Instrument holders just lost their immunity to ignore the total abuse of power that is being dished out under Sec 16 CC in order to enforce Sec 15 CC -[ Any authority who defends defacto law is criminally insane] AND frankly the only Officers who had the Constitutional power to tell an AG: no [before the 1998 the Police Act] were Order of the Garter Instrument holders. - Who else is there that can drag up the liability that's it's not business as usual other than Instrument holders? I can force the issue [like i am] BUT the AG's employees will simply carrying on with business as usual when they are enforcing that no one is above their law, until Instrument holders do their duty and start arresting politicians and banksters and even judges for clear infractions /violation of the rule of law that occur after Sept 1st because they really can't defend that they must be treasonous so that nothing changes As i see it: [after Sept 1st] Risk Management and the Order of the Garter [like Sheriffs, JPs, Coroners] must enforce that it's a crime of state for any of the AG's employees to break the Peace, with anyone acting under our claim of right because the AG is directly forbidden to use arbitrary power, under our Constitutional rule of law and respondeat superior, because we are in the body called Parliament that guarantees that we can administer our affairs and can demand to be ruled under Sec 8 CC common law jurisdiction, AND a genuine catch-22 trap is created, where authority's trust is irrevocably broken at the onset, by 2 or 3 witnesses [Heb 10] who insist that we have no such right. I'm well aware that i'm raising the stakes by just calling for a Millennium Trust Challenge and frankly what i'm pressing is only now possible because of what the OPPT, and the new Pope did. - They did it so that somewhere, middle management [like you] would have to make a choice that condemns them all if they can't get over 'the fear of the one who is in authority' [Rom 13]. AND then it says: when all debt in the world is paid, the only remaining debt is the eternal love for our neighbour... NOTICE OF INTENT: It's now my turn to have my attention drawn to you and your Office. On this i want to make really clear that i do all of this activism in order to give those in authority a chance to do good so that good can result. As far as I'm concerned YOU Marc Mayrand are held by oath to obey this Papal decree, and [when called upon to act] you must fix the flaws of undermining the form introduced under your blind trust [watch]. In this way [as to Isaiah 3] the nobody is rising again against the noble, in order to confront one of my brothers in my father's house.

2.

3.

4.

The last time i tried this, it cost JP Kinsley his job. I tried to engage Will Corbett, to be a settler in this trust and to approach you diplomatically, but it didn't happen. So i took my trustee's advice and I recently pressed a gang of powerful Order of Canada trustees to join our trust challenge, and i will soon get an answer to Isaiah 59 or Rom 13 Trustees simply cannot let me in on what's going on in their playpen, and i have no problem with this. Because it's never been my choice what you all pick. As one of our Officers wisely pointed out 'i can keep getting 'no' as an answer, and because of my goal there is no reason to stop pressing for 'a yes'. AND those who i've tested simply fail say 'a yes' once. NOTICE OF LIABILITY: As I see it, here's your moment to chose, As a short preamble, I remember that under Kinsley's watch, the Party Whip had its own separate form and just recently this form was vacated and it was replaced with this title just being a superficial title like all the other party titles. This fundamental implementation is by definition corporate tyranny. Now, my trustee assures me that the 'Party Whip' was held to an oath to the UCC and during your watch, at face value, the Party Whip was subverted from being the UCC Sheriff for the Party. 1. I'm now, and soon to be formally recognized by you [apparently by Oct 11th] as Party Whip and I hereby through a MANDAMUS i demand to affirm to whatever new oath there is in order to be compliant to being the Sheriff of the Marijuana Party, under this new UCC trust. 2. It's my understanding that with this engagement, it means that you, and every other Party Whip MUST also swear or affirm by oath to being compliant to this new UCC trust. 3. I'm well aware that the implications of this implementation are huge, and i do so for a very good reason NAMELY: i'm pressing for a Peaceful ways and means to engage a make-over 4. i'm presently trying to engage a BC Civil court by Thanksgiving [Canada] with our trust Pier and Pure trust challenge, but then i might be held back, by others holding back. 5. As i see it: i can't file a successful court motion without my trustee(s) saying the file is ready to table. AND again i have no problem with being kept out of the loop of what trustees do, As i see it. The attached October 1st private city notice will explain my present position more clearly. I'm sorry for pursuing Isaiah 59 so hard, but it's better than 2Thes2, which just might happen. As i see it, if 1/3rd of the world must be destroyed as to Revelation, then Jesus Christ died for nothing. If you can't see a Millennium challenge unfolding here, then that's just the way it is. After a decade of getting 'nothing but no' other than the resignation of a lot of Solicitors General [for example] - i just might get 'a yes' this Thanksgiving, The voice from the west is being pressed. AND fate renders down to Faith or lack there-of, of those who are engaged to chose [as to Ecclesiastes 8] 4 Since a kings word is supreme, who can say to him, What are you doing? 5 Whoever obeys his command will come to no harm, and the wise heart will know the proper time and procedure. 6 For there is a proper time and procedure for every matter, though a person may be weighed down by misery.7 Since no one knows the future,who can tell someone else what is to come? No one knows, when this event called INTHAT DAY happens [like what i keep trying to set up,] It will inevitably happen; i'm presently facing the same old 'same old' - I don't have a clue how any event that i press will end. BUT, I do know how to press for big Constitutional challenges that lead to 'a yes' or 'no' decision, AND frankly what have i lost, if authority insists on saying 'no' again? So i ask you once again, try to see it my way, we can work it out. marc boyer.