IF THE RULE OF LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO THE FINANCIAL MARKETS WHAT IS TO STOP ME FROM ROBBING A BANK?

According to all the lawyers and the BC Securities Commission the issue between U-GO Brands Inc. and the BCSC is a Securities matter so our complaints about how they run courts with no transcripts, use the testimony of an investigator who perjured herself multiple times, publish material they know is false, tamper with evidence. What about breaking and entering in order to try to find a way to frame us for charges they know are false and continuing to attempt to prosecute someone for over half a million dollars worth of fraud charges a year after they know they that person is innocent have no merit. According to them the Rule of Law does not apply to the Financial Markets as its a special highly regulated environment, if this is true then perhaps I should just go to the nearest Bank and rob it blind. You see after all I am operating in the Financial Markets and the Rule of Law doesn't apply here as far as I've been told. Good thing I'm not good at listening, much better at thinking.

 If the Rule of Law and due process do not apply to the Financial markets are we not slaves of those who control the Financial Markets?

 There are some serious questions that need to be asked by the Canadian public as we move into 2016

during times of global economic uncertainty. The BC Privacy Commissioner has expressed that routine mass suppression of information and denial to access of information is common in the BC Govt in recent years. Questions like the very ones I ask now are suppressed and not just in the BC Govt. What is being hidden? Its time we asked some hard questions for the future of our children!
There is a broad movement towards a National regulatory agency for the Securities industry and this is an excellent move for the growth of start-ups and acceleration of corporate development that could
create long lasting benefits to all Canadians for a long time to come.

That being said our current regulatory environment is literally akin in many ways to an extortion

racket while real scammers pay the price of 'Compliance' and continue to do business. I am not saying there is not a need for regulation and the enforcement of Law in regards to real frauds, scam artists and market manipulation as surely there is but our system is broken.

My questions are based on reality, actual experience and the law. I have no problems releasing all of

the information pertaining to these questions but for the sake of brevity at this time will simply ask the questions all of us Canadians should be asking.


Question 1. How can a Government Regulatory agency mandated with Enforcement and
Regulation duties in the Securities Markets operate in a FAIR and UNBIASED manner when
their funding is maintained through creating regulatory offences that need to be broken in order for them to receive funding.

 The answer is that it cannot. This principle is absolutely contrary to the concept of the Rule of Law

which governs this nation. The Rule of law as defined in Duhaimes Legal dictionary describes it as a
principle where no one is outside the law. One of the defining characteristics of the Rule of Law is a
system that exists free of conflict of interest. An Agency that must create offences that need to be
broken in order to sustain itself is constantly a complete conflict of interest in addition to being a
shackle on our economy. Our corporate structure in most provinces is thin or hollow and though it is
getting better in regards to the Start-Up and Tech boom culture there is a long ways to go in order to
build a strong nation whose wealth stays in the hands of hardworking Canadians.

Question 2. Why is it that ten years ago across many of these Provincial Regulatory Agencies

most of the Canadian public were able to invest freely in Canadian start-ups in the private
 Venture Capital markets but today they are not?! The number of Canadians able to invest today in a similar start-up is only between %2 and %10 of the population depending on the Province.

The Regulatory Agencies claim they are protecting the population by limiting access. Start-Ups can

gain access to the market by paying lawyers to do paperwork that in essence keeps them 'Compliant'.

The paperwork costs are often half the cost of operating a business, and worse do nothing to prevent

actual fraud as the real scammers pay the cost of doing business and continue. The official position of
these Regulatory Agencies is that they protect the market and prevent fraud by limiting investing only
to 'sophisticated investors'. 'Sophisticated investors' are measured by the size of their bank accounts
with $1,000,000.00 being the average prerequisite. I don't see the Government trying to stop your
average joe from blowing their life savings at a casino or a on a credit card investing in the
hardworking people of this Province should be no different. In order to stop the real frauds follow the
money.

Question 3. How can a Regulatory Enforcement Agency justify twice posting the banking

information on its website for the public to see?
 This is just further evidence of malicious and vindictive prosecution we have endured.

Question 4. How can the BCSC claim to administer the law in a fair and just manner when they deny access to records including transcripts of its own 'hearings' on legal matters? Is this not in conflict with Canadian Supreme Court Law?

Question 5. If economic freedom is not our right, regardless of our net worth are we not slaves?
Today across most of the Financial world Lawyers and Bureaucrats along with the Bankster Cartel have fooled the public into believing that because finances are such a delicate matter the rule of law no longer applies to the Financial world.
 This is simply a lie to cover up a massive extortion racket on the population.
 If the rule of law no longer applies to the Financial markets then couldn't I be justified in robbing a bank?

The official legal position of the BC Securities Commission is that it is a privileged and not a right to
participate in the Capital markets, and I would agree however when participating I the Capital markets it is my right to The defining factor of privilege is that the amount of money one has seems to have a direct link to whether or not they are privileged enough to participate in the market. This is simply excuse to overlook an agency that extorts the BC population while ignoring real fraud.
 

Question 6. How can MP's and our elected officials tell us this is of no concern nor do they have

control over it? (With the exception of The Honourable Mr Justin Trudeau no one has voiced support or even pretended they were concerned in regards to these issues. Thank you to Mr Trudeau for taking the time to talk with us about it perhaps that will help spark a national dialogue.)

Question 7. If our elected officials have no control over the purse strings in Venture Capital and

small business and nor do you, then who does?

Question 8. How can a Regulatory Agency knowing that its lead investigator in a case Perjured

themselves under oath in the conduct of their duty continue with using that investigator and their related affidavits as its only evidence against someone in a prosecution?? This is the same 'court' that had no transcripts for some hearings as they claim they do not always record them.

Question 9. How can the BC Securities Commission knowing that details it published about the personal lives of Canadian Citizens are not true, continue with having them posted in public for years?

 

 

Officials are on record knowing the accused are innocent yet prosecution continues and public
humiliation in the form of slander remains online.

Question 10.
 How can a Government Agency whose mandate is to protect the integrity of the

market and the shareholders claim it is doing its job when shareholders call them for help and
they simply ignore them for months? The Agency then turns around and attempts to entrap them for seven months all the while withholding the real truth about their inquiry/complaint!!

Question 11.
 Why would a Government Agency deny the chance to save the shareholders money and their company? Even if a director was guilty of a regulatory infraction the offer was made to stand down and replace the director with a viable alternative thus saving 400 investors money.
Why run a legitimate company who had 30,000 stores place orders North America wide into the ground when said company did everything in its power including hire multiple high priced

Lawyers to ensure 'compliance'. Canada could have used another Billion Dollar start-up!

Question 12.

Is entrapment and collusion now standard protocol for Regulatory Agencies in this Country?