bc726

JCT: Marc Emery's great supporter drgreenthumb is really
asking for a long beating today:


DR:Hey Marc you should have seen Emery last night in Regina.
He was great, he got the message out well and had a good 8-
10 minutes on the saskatchewan news. He says he will hold a
similar rally at each court date. Looks like nobody was
arrested at the latest smoke out, but a few thousand news
watchers heard the message. It's harmless and he also
pointed out that while it was legal for the past 2 years
there was no great harm to society. WooooHooo! Emery for
Prime Minister! lol John would love that eh?

JCT: I've been shouting that it's been legal since Terry
Parker day since Terry Parker Day. Emery's the johnny-come-
lately with the same message and the Dr.'s so impressed that
he finally got my message that he wants the slow-learner for
Prime Minister. Har har har har. The guy who ran away from
me in debate has a strategic weakness that will make him
have to keep running from his dirty deeds forever. He won't
always have a home-town crowd scared the ask the tough
questions. Someday, I or someone with the tough questions
will put him on the spot and the saying that Superior Court
Justice Pitt didn't have the jurisdiction to issue Parker
ex parte remedy as the reason he suppressed Alan Young's
spiking of the Pitt decision won't look good once it's
admitted that Pitt had the power to issue an emergency
short-notice remedy. I've pointed out the truth to you, Dr.,
and without having any answer, you're still supporting the
Judas Goat who helped Young spike Pitt?

I've tried to explain the difference between a strategic and
tactical error. You can recoup from a tactical error, not a
strategic one. Letting Canadian exemptees hit the expiry
wall by not telling of the Paquette Exemption Extension Form
is a strategic error that lets me paint him a rat to
whoever I'm talking to. Spiking the Pitt decision is the
same kind of rat-certifying evidence that you've ignored in
your casual acceptance of such s*** for friends.


Cops told to enforce marijuana laws
Gillian Livingston
The Ottawa Citizen
Friday, October 17, 2003

GL: TORONTO -- The glory days for Ontario marijuana smokers
are over, for now, with police laying possession charges
again after months of turning a blind eye to public toking
when possession laws were temporarily loosened. OPP officers
have been advised they can now enforce Canada's laws against
marijuana possession after a court ruling last week
clarified that those laws were constitutional.

JCT: Let's get the name of the guy who misled the cops so he
can he gone after when he's proven wrong.

GL: Ontario's marijuana possession laws were called into
question earlier this year when a judge threw out a
marijuana possession charge against a 16-year-old boy. His
lawyer successfully argued that because there was no
effective program for sick people to possess medical
marijuana without breaking the law, then the law didn't
prohibit possession. That ruling was upheld on appeal. But a
Court of Appeal ruling struck down parts of the medical
marijuana access program, making it, in the court's eyes,
constitutionally valid. By fixing the medical-marijuana
program, the ruling made the marijuana-possession laws
constitutionally valid again.

JCT: Valid again. No one asks if they can do that. Where are
our champions?

GL: By fixing the medical-marijuana program, the court
ruling made the pot-possession laws constitutionally valid
again. That ruling effectively sealed a legal loophole.
"They've now been given a green light," said Alan Young, a
lawyer and longtime legalization advocate who represented
medical marijuana-users in the most recent case.

JCT: With Judas Young ever ready to reassure everyone that
the court's decision is on the up-and-up, how is the abuse
of their power ever going to get out. Sure helps having narc
moles doing out talking for us.

GL: Although police officers are only doing their jobs in
upholding pot-possession laws, Young said that some
enforcement agencies have voiced dissatisfaction with the
law and have suggested it's a burden on their resources.
"This is an ideal occasion for them to make their political
views clearer and actually tell the government that they're
not interested in enforcing the law anymore," Young said.

JCT: Judas Young ever presuming that the law was recreated
on the up-and-up.

GL: The advisory was sent out to provincial police officers
last week after the ruling, Crate said, but information
wasn't readily available Thursday about the number of pot-
possession charges laid since then. Sgt. Jim Muscat, a
spokesman for the Metro Toronto Police Department, the
province's largest municipal police force, was also unable
to provide numbers on how many pot-possession charges have
been laid since last week, but said his officers would
uphold the law. "We're treating it the way we treated it
before," he said. "The law is in effect."

JCT: Notice they didn't mention who misled the police other
than Alan Young. It certainly wasn't just Alan Young who
authorized the police to start busting again though he sure
was helpful in their effort to spread the word.

GL: York Regional police, north of Toronto, also said they
would start laying possession charges but wouldn't
investigate any possession incidents before last week's
ruling. Copyright 2003 The Ottawa Citizen

JCT: It's always Judas Young for the Prohibitionist spin.
=====


DR: i wanted this open for all to read marc i hope you don't
mind me posting it here
Hi marc I'm not trying to push Turmel's buttons. I have
always maintained that I like John Turmel and his methods
even if many others don't.
The only thing He does that I object to is the personal
attacks against anyone who doesn't share his views.

JCT: Cheap shot. How is asking the Cannabis Vulture to
explain why he spiked the Parker Pitt declaration and the
Paquette extensions a personal attack? I only do personal
attacks when they don't answer for their treason. I only
started doubting your bona fides when you managed to
overlook these serious betrayals. Then I told you you didn't
come up to my ethical standards. That you continue to defend
the guy who can't says Pitt couldn't give ex parte remedy is
even more of an indictment of your behavior. Sure you may be
sick but it's no excuse to abide evil and support the doers.
So don't call my indictments personal attacks. They haven't
been answered and the doers of the dirty deeds are well
recompensed for being my public foils. Judas Young sounds
like he got his 30 pieces of silver already.

DR: I don't blame him when it comes to Alan Young who had no
business doing what he did in Pitt no matter what he thought
about it not standing up.

JCT: Thanks but you also don't blame Emery who supports
Young to this day. You sound like a nice guy to have around
but you bring bad friends with you. Saboteurs. No thanks.
Stay away with them.

DR: We don't need people who claim to be on our side
assisting the crown in any way shape or form.

JCT: Tell it to Emery who still supports Young even though
everyone knows the Crown brought him in before Chapnik,
before Feldman and before McIsaac. How many times does the
Crown Lara Speirs have to bring Young into Parker's case for
you to get the message that the Bonnie not bring in Clyde to
help Parker?

DR: They have proven to be capable of trampling over our
rights by themselves. I never try to start shit with him but
Emery has long been a hero of mine and has been standing up
for our culture long before i ever heard of john turmel or
even before i started talking to you in the chat.

JCT: He was a good guy in the past so his sabotage doesn't
need checking into. How would the Medpot battle fared had
Emery played up the Pitt victory and had Young argued it
for the win rather than help the Crown get it set aside? It
call it a practical cinch. It as so strong with just Terry
that they had to blow cover of their top narc mole, the
esteemed rat lawyer professor, to stop him. And Emery
supported him all the way. You go vote for Emery for PM.

DR: He does a lot for all of us and is an important part of
the legalization movement.

JCT: So would a good narc mole. But I've pointed it out to
you before so you're aware of that and you're repeating the
sheep-dipping spin knowing it could be sheep-dipping is you
once again helping the bad guys. Remember, I judge by what
you do, not what you say.

DR: I also appreciate all John has done for us and have made
that clear consistantly, however I will not stand by while
somebody wants to call me stupid or traitorous or accuse my
friends of the same.

JCT: What other word would you have for suggesting we turn
to the guy who spiked the Parker and Paquette medpot wins?
What other word would you have for evading Emery's dirty
deeds while praising his sheep-dipping. Sorry, you're hyping
a crooked aberrant sleaze. You're birds who flock together.
Are you traitorous because you try to bring a traitor into
our midst? Stupid? Your words. Pick.

You have seen for yourself how quickly i jump to your own
defence when anybody here says anything against you.

JCT: Yeah but I didn't do any dirty deeds that need
defending. The only thing you'd have to defend me about is
my accusations about their dirty deeds. I don't need
defence. And the fact you defend my no dirty deeds is no
reason to be defending Emery's alleged dirty deeds.

DR: This is part of who i am in real life as well not just
online. If i overhear somebody badmouthing a friend, i
could care less if it makes me unpopular in the present
company i will tell them to shut their ****ing mouths.

JCT: And you deserve to keep losing your honest friends and
keep your crooked ones.

DR: I don't mean to be pissing off john when i talk about
Emery's latest public appearance, i simply think it is
relevant to what we discuss here and i am proud of his
representation of us as a culture.

JCT: I'm amazed that he can show his face in public knowing
that sometime, somewhere, someplace, someone's going to ask
him why he spiked the Parker and Paquette stories. Ex parte
Pitt won't work and you haven't even tried to explain why he
spiked the Paquette win so Canada's exemptees wouldn't find
out.

DR: He doesn't try to divide us between medical and non
medical use, he explains to the public why the laws are
unjust and puts the issue right in the public's face so it
can't be ignored.

JCT: Gee, I guess you didn't notice that I don't either,
I've been writing on the open net, not Emery's censored
board, and put it in the public's, and the government's and
the court's faces so it can't be ignored. But I can
understand how you'd be impressed with our junior "bust-me-
with-a-gram" johnny-come-lately. Especially if you're not
one of their morons but one of their smarter moles.

DR: Marc and John are both true believers and true fighters
for the same cause.

JCT: I worked for abolition of prohibition and Young and
Emery have worked to "ensure that Turmel's motion to
invalidate the law does not proceed." Young's words. And
Emery supports him. How dare you say those judases and I
share the same goals? You're as crooked as they are.

DR: They just go about it differently.

JCT: I didn't try to ensure their efforts to invalidate the
law would not proceed. I didn't sabotage their efforts.
They sabotaged mine. And you're with them.

DR: Both are legitimate and I only wish John could see that.

JCT: Sorry but as long as I can keep pointing out how they
have sabotaged my honest efforts and how you don't
disapprove, what do you want me to see?

DR: I appreciate being part of this list so i can keep up to
date on what John is doing much as i like keeping an eye on
cannabis culture to see what the larger pot community is up
to.

JCT: It's an open info war. Nothing special other than when
compared to Emery's censored boards and all the other
censored Canadian medpot lists around. It's just that
nobody's used to a list where the owner isn't scared of any
dirty deeds being brought up. Emery's the one who censors
his list and threaten anyone who dares broach his dirty
deeds. Comparing him and me shows you up.

DR: John has chosen to call me names and even insinuate that
I am an enemy to the cause, when i have supported and
cheered his every move except his condemnation of Marc
Emery.

JCT: That's right. You should be ashamed for supporting a
saboteur without asking him about the charges. You should be
ashamed. But you're not stupid. So you're probably crooked
with them. All along.

DR: I know at least a hundred people who never even heard of
John until I told them about him and either forwarded his
posts to them directly or gave them the web addy.

JCT: If you're just a lovable honest idiot who likes
introducing crooks to his friends, okay, sorry I'm so rough
but I still don't want you with your friends in on our work.

DR: To suggest that I am in league with the prohibitionists
simply because i support Emery is exactly the kind of
bullshit that makes people not take him seriously.

JCT: And yet, Alan Young and Marc Emery have lied about
Pitt's ex parte power, you know it, they're the two dirtiest
narc saboteurs in the country and you openly support them.
I'm sad for you whether you're a moron or a blown mole.

DR: I wish John all the success in the world as I do for all
the repressed pot people everywhere. And lastly i want to
bring up the point that we are all in this together and
can't all pot use be considered medical use?

JCT: That's my case, isn't it? Hadn't you noticed when you
alleged that only Emery was for total legalisation?

DR: I mean even the recreational user gets stress relief,
protection from seizure disorders etc? I think that medical
use /recreational use distinction only serves to further
divide us and attempts to tie our freedom to the medical
profession when there is no need to do so at all.

JCT: That's what the preventative medical was all about.

DR: They have drawn the line of what is acceptable risk by
regulating alcohol's legal sale. Since their own studies
show pot to be less harmful than alcohol it is quite clear
that they don't have a leg to stand on. I agree with John
that what they are doing is genocide, but i would take that
further even and say it is not only genocide against
epileptics but genocide of our entire culture.

JCT: But Parker cinched the case for genocide of epileptics
in his 2000 win.

DR: If we were any other minority group what they do to us
and our families would most surely be considered a hate-
crime, and done in such an organized way and on such a grand
scale I think it is best described as cultural genocide.

JCT: It's not a culture that's being killed, it's a lot of
different sick people. And if you count extra quantity of
life for AIDS patients, better quality of life, it's a heck
of a big genocide. And it's world-wide. And I'm the only UN-
known politician who's going to take it all the way there.

DR: John says he doesn't want my type on his side? I am a
family man who wants legalization and is willing to openly
say so and attend protests and the like, and try to help
end this madness even refuse to vote for anyone who does not
advocate full legalization. Well i want as many people like
me as possible on my side.

JCT: How can I ever trust you when you have shown such bad
judgment in people? Sorry, I will always have to take
anything you say with a grain of salt because you could be
one of the Young crew of guys out to "ensure Turmel's
motion to invalidate the law does not proceed." And if I
seem like I overreacted at your trying to get Terry to go
with Emery, nothing personal, you paid for your bad advice.

DR: If there were enough of us willing to risk on line
communication and all the pot users stood up and demanded
freedom our "team" would be very large and powerful.

JCT: If, if, if, all talk. I am trying invalidate the law
and Young and his crew are trying to stop me, as Young
avowed in his letter.

DR: I do not condone what the protestors did to john when
they attempted to drown out john at the courts, in fact had
i been there i would have been the first to tell them to
shut the **** up and let him speak.

JCT: Too late. The media spin generate by Alan Young behind
their interference is all Canadians have heard to far. And
John Conroy out West whose first, and only public
impression, is that what the court did is hunky-dory. Who
wants to defend a lawyer who doesn't know right off that
what they did was wrong. Even McAllister was muttering about
it. But not Young and Conroy.

DR: People pulling that kind of shit is what gives pot users
a bad name and I'm sure he looked like a complete idiot.
His attempt to drown out John's voice at the courts when he
was trying to inform the public about why the judgment was
wrong was bad enough without giving the media another
example of an idiot pothead to display for the world.

JCT: But that was the whole Hitzig spin. Ignore them,
they're nuts. Everything's fine and we won some stuff
despite the law being back. Young sure did get my motion to
invalidate the law to not proceed once I'd invalidated the
law.

DR: They love to paint that type of picture of our people.
That is why Marc is such a good spokesperson. He shows up
in a suit and tie, looks respectable and is an eloquent
speaker.

JCT: Me too, suit, tie, better gift of the gab. I've been
told I'm eloquent by the Supreme Court of Canada. Emery's
dull. I caught his act. But Marc's finished. No self-
respecting medpotter could accept what he did to Parker and
Paquette. Only people like you. He's finished in politics.
The walking dead and he doesn't realize it yet.

DR: We need more people seeing his image as being more the
norm and less people with Dr suess hats making a spectacle
of themselves and making all of us cannabis users look like
raving lunatics.

JCT: I've always felt that the narc moles doing our talking
for us always dressed down.

DR: When i say Marc should run for PM i say it in all
seriousness.

JCT: But he's so corrupt. So undemocratic. So foul-mouthed.
I just don't see the respectability needed and he can't
answer why he sabotaged the Parker and Paquette stories.
Never will. If he and you think the "Alan Young says
Superior Court's can't issue ex parte remedies" alibi is
going to stand up, you're both badly informed. And you know
that Pitt's the only thing that can stop the new legislation
from being validated so you know his jurisdiction will be
raised at the top. The highest court will either act
completely crookedly, ignoring basic court rules, or Pitt
will be validated as a judgment prior to Lederman based
only on the eligibility and not the supply red herring
raised by the Hitzigs.

DR: There is no one better or more recognized who could pull
it off.

JCT: Marc Emery will never survive censoring his board,
spiking those medpot wins and supporting Alan Young.
The bigger he's built up, the harder he'll fall when the
tumble time comes. And you know someone's going to broach
him on why he helped sabotage the cannabis culture.

DR: When John lashes out at me or i at him for that matter I
think to myself it is no wonder a lot of us have a chip on
our shoulder when we cannot seem to stop the unjust
persecution and we are all so used to being looked at in a
bad light that most of us are in a constant state of anger,
at least when not in the grip of fear.

JCT: What's Emery got to be angry about? My calling him on
why he spiked those stories? Aw, too bad. I'm not really
angry. You're taking the beating you deserve whether you're
a moron or a mole. I can't let people keep thinking you're
on the level when you so easily want to introduce saboteurs
into our midst. I'm just warning everyone that you hang
around with dirt and probably smell the same. Sorry.

DR: If we don't get anything positive from the supreme court
I think the time for peaceful protest is over and we might
have to up the ante to get our point across that we refuse
to be persecuted any more. Time to cause a little discomfort
for them and start making the prohibition hurt the rest of
Canada the way it hurts us. The potheads in the states
could follow suit. There are millions of us.

JCT: Millions led by guys who are against Turmel's motion to
invalidate the law. And they'll love you for leading them to
the guys who are against invalidating the law. Har har.

DR: We need to end the divisiveness and work together.

JCT: We need to work together with the guy who keeps scoring
on our own net. Sure, doctor, thanks for the advice but I'd
rather kick the bums out who want to ensure that the motion
to invalidate the law does not proceed and not let them work
with us on that project.

DR: I say lets have a week long smoke out that blocks the
trans Canada highway. Lets collectively withold our taxes.
Block other peoples access to things they enjoy. Blockade
the distilleries and breweries so no one can get their
precious booze. Lets picket the stadiums and arenas,
see how the jock douchebags like us decideing how they get
THEIR entertainment. Sports are very dangerous look at the
cost to healthcare from all the sports related injuries. We
would only be protecting them from themselves, let's see how
they like it.

JCT: Considering the Judases you've chosen to follow, I guess
planning for defeat would be more your style.

DR: With poll results showing so much support in the
populace for legalization we can't afford to let them get
away with pushing this issue into the background. We have no
one worth voting for in the federal election.

JCT: That's because Marc Emery and his hand-picked never-
elected leader-for-life Marc-Boris St-Maurice own the
marijuana party and we know how Emery cheated me out the
votes in the poll at Cannabis Culture and how St-Maurice
called off the election when I showed up. Run by dictatorial
s*** like that, who'd want to join? You could live with
stink, I suppose.

DR: If we could stop being so ****in peaceful all the time
we could force them to deal with this issue.

JCT: Now you're in fantasy land. Considering the Judas
Goats you're following, you'd be trying to force them to
anything but what you need done. That's the function of
these judases, to make sure you spin your wheels for nothing.

DR: They have no right. It is our own complacency that is
our greatest enemy.

JCT: Let's get the slaves mobilized. With Judas Goats
financed by the government ready to step in and lead the
****ers astray at every turn, what would you have them do if
they did beat their complacency. DR, stay complacent.
Following the saboteurs you've chosen is leading you
nowhere but ensuring the motion to invalidate the law does
not proceed.

Turmel's buttons because he was kind to you last time )
lol Peace and have a nice day! Marc

JCT: He didn't take Marc's advice and really took a beating
today. Still, everyone has to know he's part of the Emery
crowd behind Young. If he's honest, he should be ashamed. If
he's not, he deserves what he just got.

I hope to have Court of Appeal decisions parsed by tomorrow.
Maybe I should keep it private and publish it as a book. I'm
already up to 70 pages and who'd want to read 70 pages from
long-winded Turmel? Maybe a book's the best way to go? Maybe
not. No time.

Now it's been 10 days since the decisions have been
published and no doubt everything I decide to do will have
been thought of by someone before. I can only say that it's
really tiring hearing "I told him to play his Ace of Spades
to beat the King" at every move. There's really nothing out
there that's needed to finish the job.

Abolition of prohibition was won. And then stolen. But not
legitimately. So I'll be going to get it back.

--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-756-1325 USENET: can.politics

bimballi testicula castrati

Any profits to be made from selling pot, seeds, paraphernalia and magazines
will disappear the instant pot is removed from the CC. The most-diplomatic
thing can be said about Emery, is that he has a conflict-of-interest.