This is my affidavit that I filed as a caveat to with my
Election Canada Application to run for the Marijuana Party
In this doc I demand the CEO Chief Electoral Officer
to define & stand under God’s rule of law

I file a 40 pages of supporting documentation, I filed This last DECLARATION

I did this when they threatened me will triggering unavoidable consequences by failing to comply, I sent them this thank you. I want to trigger the Act.

Rather than answer this question Jean Pierre Kinsley quit on Dec 21, 2006

After 18 years of total hypocrisy, he actually was being called – to actually do his job
It seems one of the consequences triggered is that he quit
By quitting, he triggered the consequences of Matthew 24, ” if it was not for the flight of the elect we would have had a shaking like the world has never witnessed before, and never will see again.

Nov. 27, 2006     DECLARATION WITH PREJUDICE         In regards to File # 1700-059-E06-10-L-5  
From:   Marc Boyer – candidate for Quad ra EDA of the Parti Marijuana Party
Attn: Commissioner William Corbett, and the Chief Electoral Officer Jean Pierre Kingsley

Special Notice to Jean Pierre Kingsley:  Under Sec-337 CCC – 336 CCC, return my person to a lawful society.
Special Notice to William Corbett:             Under Sec-337 CCC – 336 CCC, return my person to a lawful society.

On a jurisdiction ‘issue’ – Outline the full particulars on the territorial jurisdiction or Constitutional authority for the ‘Commissioner of Canada Elections’, to be nothing but an agent that accounts only for money transactions, and explain in detail why nobody knew any names and why the one who signed your form did not reply
This is necessary because Mr. Milligan told me his Office’s function was strictly that of an accountant, who needs every box filed, and that the only matter in his Office’s jurisdiction was failure to deliver one last set of documents, and since we are delinquent, therefore we are guilty, for this administrative issue.
Ps:   The consequences to taking away “the eligibility of the candidate to run for office again” are that:
You are vanquishing the only entity that I hold in your Canada’s jurisdiction, and I accept that offer.
I refuse to live where God’s rule of law was abandoned in order to serve ‘the one’ into Hell on Earth

On the matter of accountability to a cornerstone of law: “what is not directly prohibited cannot be implied”
When I appeared on the ‘issue’ of my candidacy, I presented an Affidavit that contained my particular circumstances, and it contained a question to declare which rule of law is Supreme, under Sec-336 CCC, and contained a demand to lawfully respond under Sec- 337 CCC.  (Dec 31- document attached)
Ps:   If the law had provided a rule or order in the Act that prevented a candidate from enjoying the right to ask a simple question as an attached caveat to his candidacy, then the Chief Electoral Officer would have denied it. 
There is no such rule, and the District Election Officer had no order to prohibit me from attaching a caveat; so he had to attach this DEMAND to my contract, but only did so after consulting with his CEO.
In law, I paid $1000.- to get and answer and until I get an answer, I hold Jean Pierre Kinsley in default.
The matter here is that Elections Canada is in default of complying with respecting a contract with society itself.

Now, we appear for your final judgment with a declaration made on October 13th, holding a far greater liability, by being a victim of slavery under Sec 338 CCC, (you would almost think, you were set-up) This manifestation really simplifies this decision, because there is no case law on Manifest Destiny, only faith that when it appears it must be recognized.  In law the consequences for FAILURE OF AN ENTITY TO COMPLY is unfathomable

On the matter of Marc Boyer’s nonfeasance to comply with the letter of administrative procedure, in the Act: 
Let it be clearly understood that I cannot defy the will of my EDA, and my EDA will not authorize me to deliver to Mike Hansen the paperwork, without answering the question, and accepting the burden to stand under a Sec-337 CCC demand, and Sec 336 CCC command to comply with God’s rule of law
In regard to Marc Boyer’s nonfeasance to complying with the letter of your rules; I do so to defend God’s law and do so with good conscience;   This act is called:           Civil Disobedience as defined in Black’s 7th
Furthermore: ‘It’s an offense unknown to man’, Sec-8 (3) CCC, to defend God’s rule of law as Supreme

PLEASE NOTE:  I’ve made sure, the liability has piled on top of each other, on many jurisdictions, and all of these cases are coming into fruit at the same time.  Until my last court dates, I had to be bait, and be patient.   After Sept 28th, no‘body’ will intervene on my behalf on my slavery, and in fairness, I have been filing motions, without full disclosure.  Blind duty to preserve the form drives everyone to act like the return of civilized life is a horror.  It must be done with faith and in love, everything else will happen smoothly by following the form. 

1. I come with good tidings to preserve the form, for the law is what binds us all to a Higher Order
2. I wait in patient anticipation for the consequences of triggering the Act.  It holds a path to Destiny

Now if nobody wants to fulfill Manifest Destiny, then the return of Paradise on Earth, through faith in prophecy of Jesus Isaiah and Paul, for the benevolent return of the Messiah will simply be overwhelming.  Get over it!
Now I give you fair notice: the prophecy line here is the parable of the Banquet.  God’s promise to Jacob was that metanoia (the about-face) will appear before the courts first – “this is the most excellent way”

1. If you fail to comply with love, and accept to act like sons then first invitation must be rescinded, and it’s a shame, because it would please my Lord so much.   I aim to please.   I am here to serve. 

Under the Order of the Garter: Shame on he who calls this one’s bankruptcy evil, for he is evil.   So be it

Marc Boyer
Can anyone explain why such a pure thought as ‘upholding Creation’ went unthought?  It’s the metanoia
It’s the only solution to abandoning the wrath of man on mankind… ‘If’ this isn’t the answer, then what is?
The meek will inherit the Earth is faith in our destiny.  By definition: To <uphold God> is the opposite of meek
The last word goes to the last statement of Archibald Cox’s legal argument for orchestrating these events: -1967
    Past generations have made a mess of things, ours no less than our fathers’.  The hope of mankind is always that a new generation may begin to make the world over quickly.  The wrong, in the simplest terms, is the damage to the foundation upon which rests the best, if not the only real, opportunity for the making-over.