To: CBC- Go Public <gopublic@cbc.ca>

Good Day,

I was formerly involved in the field of Human Rights for over twenty years, as result, I collected massive amounts of documented evidence that is absolutely shocking and for many, completely unbelievable. Please be advised, the facts reported to the Minister of National Revenue/ M.P. Gail Shea, are based upon evidence, not belief, opinion, or theory. Many lawyers and prosecutors have confirmed my understanding of the so-called "law", to be greater than their own. Perhaps someone in your own legal department is capable of doing what no one in any "government" has yet been able to do, namely, disprove the facts reported below. Please believe me, I tried to myself and could not.
The email copied and pasted below, was in response to her 2 page letter sent to me.

In the past, CBC has shown its willingness to expose various elements of fraud and/or scandals arising from the conduct of certain members of the so-called "government", so, is it willing to expose the evidence backed facts I have reported to Gail Shea on June 3, 2012?  I hope so, as my life may depend on it. This is not about "tax protesters" or "anti-government" or any other such label, as previously applied by the media, it is about the Great Deception, as referred in scriptures. When reading the email below, please realize that your children will be subject to this system one day and you may not be here to help them.    BTW, I have already proven most of this through unchallenged evidence filed in B.C. Supreme Court.  I hope to soon hear back from you.  
Copied and pasted email sent to Gail Shea, follows:



To: Gail Shea, natural woman and "P.C. M.P.,"  and for provision to all other men and women necessarily involved in the instant matter:
Notice to the Agent is Notice to the Principal and Notice to the Principal is Notice to the Agent.
Reference: Canada Revenue Agency's threat of creating extreme hardship for and risk of death to me, through unlawful garnishment

Preamble:
Prior to your reading this letter of response, kindly read the United Nation's "Convention on the Rights of Disabled Persons", Ratified by "Canada" on March 10, 2010, the purpose of which is: "to promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities, and to promote respect for their inherent dignity.” and; the "International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights", Ratified by "Canada" in August, 1976.  You may also want to peruse the "Optional Protocol" to that Covenant. You should also read the "Charter of the United Nations" and in particular, the section relating to: "A Member of the United Nations which has persistently violated the Principles contained in the present Charter..." and the resulting possibility of the expulsion of a "Member State" from the United Nations, for those persistent violations confirmed by the valid evidence I possess.

Also, kindly refer to the copies you must have, of all medical reports, or of their general content, as furnished by my former doctor to the "Province of British Columbia Ministry of Housing and Social Development" (or whatever they're calling themselves this week) in relation to the multiple disabilities I suffer daily and which, were required for qualification to receive "Provincial disability assistance". If you are not aware of all the disabilities from which I suffer and the fact that I am and have officially been a recipient of that "disability assistance" since 2009, then kindly advise how you expect to ascertain or achieve any level of understanding or assessment of the medical conditions and diseases from which I suffer, my resulting financial situation and the hardships I am already experiencing. By your requirement for me to complete the "Income and Expense/Net Worth Statement" accompanying your letter, it would appear you are without knowledge and operating blindly and completely separate from the entity on whose behalf you also operate, through the illegal delegation of power evidenced by various "Collection Agreements", in the collection of the "internal taxes" known as "Provincial Income Taxes". It should also be noted that I have been ill since at least mid 1999, as evidenced by "Motions" and my doctor's letter filed in Provincial Court of B.C., in or around 1999 - 2000 and yet, I had avoided becoming reliant on any "government assistance" throughout that entire ten year period by my own choice and the kindness of friends who had provided accommodations and gratuitous meals, until I felt I was overstaying their generous welcomes. I am not a "welfare bum", a term too often used when referring to and discriminating against such recipients. I would much rather be healthy and fully capable of supporting my own life, than to rely and become a dependent of any Human Rights violating "government", this in spite of the fact I have remained subject to more than 160 different forms of taxation every day of my 62 years of life in this form of slavery and servitude.

Response:
I have received your letter of response, date stamped as May 18  2012, autographed by you in your capacity of "Member of Parliament"
and not as the "Minister of National Revenue", notwithstanding the letterhead of the document. Is this because the "Minister of National Revenue" has been without a "Ministry" since 1999, with the creation of the "Canada Customs and Revenue Agency" Corporation? Notwithstanding any response you may provide, I write to you now in all of your capacities, including and most importantly, as the naturally created woman who from time to time, rents out her brain to the "legal fictions/artificial persons" called "Member of Parliament" and/or "Minister of National Revenue".

Thank you for your expression of concern for "the difficulties" I am "experiencing". Yes, I guess one could classify "dying", as being one of the greatest "difficulties" one is likely to encounter in "life", although it has become apparent that carrying on effective and productive communications with Officers of your C.R.A., is a close runner-up. Especially since they are the only ones appearing as vultures wanting to feed off any remains of an individual's entire existence. Is the following Article part of the reason why you have defended their "intentions"?  
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/ndp-demands-canada-wide-probe-of-alleged-corruption-at-tax-agency/article2225683/?service=mobile
 
Aside from your provision of four different addresses, three of which are in foreign "Provincial" jurisdictions (not "provincial" jurisdictions)
and to which, you have directed me to respond, or to forward completed documents, you also provided a contact phone number for
Ms. Parminder Bains, at the Surrey, British Columbia business address. My attempt to contact her at that number brought the same result as achieved every time I have phoned any number at the C.R.A., including that of Mr. Youssef El-Masri, that result being, leaving a message on their "voice mail". I have not been able to make one, single, successful telephone call to any living and relevant human individual at the C.R.A., ever!  As result, I am compelled to believe that none of them ever actually answer their telephones, as a form of "call screening", allowing them to pick and choose those with whom they would find it financially favourable to communicate. I hope my belief is incorrect, as such conduct would not give the appearance of their having intention to perform their duties in a professional manner, in spite of the appearance they operate on some form of "quota and commission" pay scale.

Please be advised, for my own security of person (as a human person), I prefer to conduct any communication with your "government" or
its agencies in writing, not by telephone, as I do not have the legal tender of all others at my disposal, to allow me to buy/own recording equipment, as employed by the C.R.A..  I find the "playing field" under such conditions to be more of a "slippery slope". Also, with the severe short term memory loss I now experience as a side-effect of one or more of the three disabilities from which I suffer daily, it is impossible for me to recall what was said and in some cases, that a conversation even took place. The short term memory loss only affects my recall of recent events, not all that happened or all that I knew prior to its onset. Further, I do not have a printer, or access to one, therefore, writing the letters you have directed me to write to certain of the four different C.R.A. Officers named in your letter, would require hand written letters, which would create great difficulties for me in relation to making any necessary corrections or insertions into previously written text of the hand written letter/correspondence, also creating insufferable degrees of stress and further negative effects on my immune system. Such archaic methods are not only technologically unnecessary, but potentially very costly for all "taxpayers" ("legal fiction/artificial person" terminology your people use to identify the source of their income), as not everyone's hand writing is legible and leaves room for misunderstandings resultant from the Officer's misreading of its text, especially in light of fact that English is a second language to many of them, and in any case, could only lead to further costs in achieving resolve of the matter.

The majority of the business world relies on new, modern technologies such as "email", in carrying on their daily business. Why does the C.R.A. not use this most convenient and most expedient method of communication? They should at least provide a direct email address to allow ongoing communications with the individual they've identified as "taxpayer" and who has become the target of their attention, just as I provided mine to the robot operating on behalf of Ms. Parminder Bains. In corresponding with any of the many types of businesses operating, I am hard pressed to think of one that presents a greater requirement for communications to be in writing, than those exchanged with the C.R.A., notwithstanding the "intention of CRA officials to be" anything "other than professional". I must assume your statement made in this regard, relates to the three recently charged "former CRA officials" who had operated in the criminal world of bribery and kick-backs while employed by the C.R.A.. I must also assume that the fear and intimidation tactics employed by certain "CRA officials" on numerous individuals also labelled as "taxpayers" (or should I say "non-taxpayers") which resulted in their committing suicide (I am aware of at least 12), were not to be included in your generalized statement relating to their having nothing other than "professional" "intention(s)". If email addresses are available for any of those you identified in your letter, then kindly provide or have them provide those email addresses to me. This is also necessary because of the difference in time zones between jurisdictions and the restricted/limited windows of opportunity available to contact even their robot machines during normal business hours. Not to forget the fact that I experience extreme difficulty in sleeping at night, due to my inability to produce the hormone melatonin and have to take supplements. As well, all the other symptoms of malnutrition I experience daily and the muscle seizures experienced when my body becomes horizontal, along with my recognition of the fact that sleeping does nothing to allow me to feel rested upon waking, but rather, to feel just as exhausted as I did the entire day before and the entire day before that. Therefore, I am rarely up and cleared of the melatonin induced brain fog before at least noon my time. The only thing I can predict in or about my life these days, is that it will remain less than worth living until the day I actually do die. You and yours appear promoting of that event.        
"The Colour of Law":
Notwithstanding the "de facto" ("not founded on law" - Barron's Canadian Law Dictionary) status of "Canada's" "Head of State" while giving "Royal Assent" to any Bill that has been passed through Parliament and thereby appearing to make it "law", throughout your letter you have identified your reliance on what is written in and allowed by, what must therefore be called, "de facto legislation" and also, what is not written or not allowed by that type of "legislation". You have thereby made clear, that any "legal action" taken, or proposed to be taken by C.R.A. officials, must appear to be "legally" supported and/or allowed by what is written in "legislation" passed by the Parliament of Canada. I fully understand the "legal" necessity of having everything written so to, in fact, make it "legal" and so everything that is done by the C.R.A., or its officials, can be substantiated, or at least appear as being "legally" valid and to prevent their taking any "illegal" actions against one of their targeted "taxpayers". I am also aware that just because an action is identified as a "legal action", it does not necessarily mean it is a "lawful action". In light of all the above, I am compelled to advise you that I am in possession of written confirmation from the "Legislative Services Branch" of your "Justice Canada", that there is not a single piece of "legislation", nor any written "legal" definition existing anywhere, that  identifies "Canada" as being "legally" comprised of any geographical area commonly called a "province" (please note use of lower-case "p") that would have a name such as: "British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan,..." and so forth. There is nothing that is written anywhere to "legally" confirm otherwise and I hold you to the strict proof of the contrary. Therefore, and since you admit to being a staunch supporter and follower of what is "written" in various legal instruments, I must also ask that you to direct me to the "legislation", "de facto" or "de jure", that would allow the "Canada Revenue Agency" to take any form of "legal" action that would also be "lawful", against any inhabitant of any geographical area that "legally", is not "a part of Canada". Reciprocal Agreements entered into with the City State, the District of Columbia, are not relevant to the instant matter.

I am also compelled to advise that I am aware of the different contexts created by the capitalization of the first letter of any generic geographical term, such as "city, town, state, province", as expressed in the Translation Bureau's publication: "Canadian Style
A Guide to Writing and Editing". Just as I am aware of the change of context resultant from the writing of an alleged "name" of a human person entirely in upper-case lettering, not only making it a non-English "word", but also destroying any ability to identify it as being a "proper noun", "the name of a person, place or thing", and of which, only the first letter is capitalized, not to overlook the fact that such a composition of upper-case letters is a contravention of the "Official Languages Act", by showing total disrespect for the Rules of Grammar of English. In fact, every document created by any "government" contains similar texts written entirely in upper-case lettering, which is not provided for or allowed by those Rules of Grammar of English. My understanding that such compositions of upper-case characters of the English alphabet is only allowed to be used in "Department of National Defence documents" to identify "the specific part of an exercise name", "e.g. Exercise SILENT DEFENDER" and in Admiralty Law, to the names of ships and various other sea going vessels.  

I am also aware that the "government of Canada" has not created a written "legal" definition of the term "Province", as have all "Provincial Legislatures" in their respective "Interpretation Act(s)", while "Canada's" "Interpretation Act", or any other of its "Acts", only provide a written "legal" definition of the term "province", and it does not "include" any geographical area that is commonly called and referred to on the street, as being a "province", as those named above, but rather, it only "includes" the 3 Territories. I am also aware of the proper usage of the term
"includes", as confirmed by the recognized language authority Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage. I am also aware of the two "legal maxims" (a "maxim" is "a set of facts that need no proof", i.e. "step off that cliff and you'll fall to the bottom" - similar to a mathematical axiom, the sum of two equal numbers will always be equal) relative to usage of the term "includes", which are: "the inclusion of one is the exclusion of another" and "the expression of one is the exclusion of another". All of which confirm that when using the term "includes", all of the components that are intended to be seen as being included, must be either written or expressed immediately following the use of that term. I am also aware of two "Supreme Court of Canada" rulings confirming the above proper usage of "includes". I am also aware that there is no such thing as "the government of the province of British Columbia", or "of the province of Alberta", or any other geographical area commonly called a "province" by people on the street. Rather, there are only "governments of the Province of...", all identified "in the corporate sense" by the capitalization of the first letter "P".

I am also aware that all existing "legislation" is under "copyright protection", the purpose of which is only to: "the protection of a private opinion or idea". This in itself poses a serious question as to their being "public laws", and not just "private corporate policies", as a company (a "legal fiction/artificial person"), like "Wal-Mart" might rely upon. Further, if they were true "public laws", Assented to by someone in possession of lawful authority to make them "laws", then they would belong to us all and could not qualify or be subject to copyright protection. It would also allow individuals to acquire the "Official Version(s)" without having to pay again in order to get it and thereby remove those financial restrictions, resulting in reduced numbers of people who would live in "ignorance of the law". I am also aware that the entire operation of the current system is totally reliant on the population remaining in that ignorance in order to financially sustain the fictional entities the system has created. Those being the "legal fictions/artificial persons", such as the ones that you, from time to time, pretend to be, by acting in their capacities. The fact that you are merely "acting" confirms that you, the natural woman, have no authority over anyone, only the "legal fiction/artificial person" has what must then be, "fictional" or "artificial" authority, as assigned it by the respective de facto legislation, or otherwise, "artificial law". This is supported by fact that one cannot do physical harm to the "State", as it is merely a "fiction", an "artificial person" that is not capable of feeling or thinking anything and has no life or real property that could be subject to threat.    

Along with all of the foregoing, there is also the issue of each and every "government" being Registered as a "Company" in both the United States Security and Exchange Commission, where "Canada" shows its "Business Address" as "Washington, D.C.", and also in Dunn & Bradstreet, where all "Provincial Ministries" are identified with a phrase to the effect: "BRITISH COLUMBIA PROVINCE OF also traded as..." and followed by the name of the particular "Ministry". These Registrations provide clear indication that there are no true and lawfully constituted "governments de jure" operating in any geographical area that is believed to be "a part of Canada", but rather and only,
out-for-profit, pure corporations. Further, and in light of "Canada's" "Business Address", it appears possible that it is a direct subsidiary corporation of the "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CORPORATION". Heaven only knows, or should I say Hell only knows, the actual implications of this fact. After all, having a "Business Address" within a known "City State", a totally autonomous entity that is not a part of any country, certainly disables ones ability to recognize "the government of Canada" as being a valid and lawfully constituted true government, of any kind, or at all. Perhaps this also provides reason for the de facto status held by the one acting in capacity of "Canada's Head of State".

As a result of all of the above facts, established and confirmed by many of your "government's" own legal instruments, it is necessary for you  to provide copies of or direction to, valid and lawful, written evidence to the contrary, including any true "public laws" Assented to by one in
de jure possession of the sovereign power. This is necessary to remove any potential for my reliance on Section 15 of the Criminal Code of Canada, entitled: "Obedience to de facto law".

I am also aware of the Legal Maxim: "Jurisdiction once challenged must be proved". This letter of response is intended to challenge your jurisdiction and that of your "government" and to provide you the opportunity to establish as fact, that you, in any of your official capacities, or any Agent acting on behalf of, or "in the service of" "the government of Canada", is in possession of the necessary de jure authority to make any kind of demand on any individual who is not "in the service of the government of Canada" or of a "Province" and has not knowingly waived their Human Rights and entered into any form of "master/servant employment relationship" with either such "government". Only the provision of this valid evidence will free you and others involved from liability for the Human Rights violations committed against all natural men and women forced to deal with demands placed on them by your "government" and any of it's Agents. This liability exists in spite of any "official capacity" claimed at the time of the alleged violations. You are hereby Noticed of this challenge and opportunity for disclosure.

I am confident in your ability to comprehend what I have reported here, as your knowledge and understanding of the "Income Tax Act" comprised of more than 1400 pages of extremely ambiguous language (contrary to "Maxwell's Interpretation of Statutes"), plus 483 pages of Income Tax Application Rules and Regulations and 35 remission orders, must surely speak to your competence in easily comprehending written materials. No "Interpretation" section is necessary to the comprehension of matters involved in this letter, as I have written and re-written it over a five day period, in the plainest form of English possible, considering the subject matter to which it relates and the conditions from which, I suffer every moment.

I await your only appropriate response and provision of the above identified valid documents necessary to establish your lawful authority and jurisdiction over me, a natural man, who is not "in the service of" any "government", de facto or de jure and who knows and exercises all Natural and Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

Further Notice:
I have notified my friends and relatives that in the event of my death, they should do whatever is necessary to ascertain the reason for my death, not just the cause, and if it is determined in any way related to any action(s) taken by any individual while "in the service of the government of Canada" or of any other "government", they should file a lawsuit for "Wrongful Death", against the individuals named in this and other correspondence relative to the instant matter, in their private capacities as men and woman and not as the "legal fictions/artificial persons" that they, from time to time, pretend to be. As a "legal fiction/artificial person" is not capable of violating anything or causing anyone's death and only a man or woman could be answer-able for such conduct and its results.

                                                                                                                            Giving respect where due,
                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                            David Butterfield, natural man, and;
                                                                                                                            Defender of all Human Rights.