PRESS CONFERENCE: CALL FOR JAILING OF INTERNET DISSIDENT A “DISGRACE,” SAYS CAFE

Written by Paul Fromm

Wednesday, 22 July 2009 06:37

*Canadian Association for Free Expression* *Box** 332**,* *Rexdale**, Ontario, M9W 5L3* *Ph: 905-274-3868; FAX: 905-278-2413* *Paul Fromm, B.Ed, M.A. Director* July 22, 2009 *-- **For Immediate Release –* * Press Conference: Call for Jailing of Internet Dissident A “Disgrace,” Says CAFE* *REGINA*. The Canadian Association for Free Expression (CAFÉ) will hold a press conference in Regina in front of 1920 Broad St at 9:00 a.m. Thursday morning, July 23, to blast efforts by the Canadian Human Rights Commission to send a former university math and computer science instructor to jail solely for the non-violent expression of his political views on the Internet.. Regina resident Terry Tremaine faces a contempt of court hearing Thursday (Room 1600 (Labour Relations Board), 1920 Broad St. Regina, SK) and the prosecution is seeking a three year prison term. Café Director Paul Fromm acted as Mr. Tremaine’s agent at his Canadian Human Rights Tribunal hearing in Ottawa in 2006, where the penniless Mr. Tremaine was found guilty of a “discriminatory practice” and fined $4,000 (despite income of less than half the poverty level) for posting his political views on the Internet. He was also slapped with a life-time “cease and desist” gag order. Mr. Tremaine is the victim of a vendetta,” says Mr. Fromm, who points to the same Ottawa lawyer Richard Warman who launched the original human rights complaint and a subsequent Criminal Code “hate law” complaint which will be heard in a preliminary hearing this fall. Warman’s complaints to the University of Saskatchewan also resulted in Mr. Tremaine’s losing his position as an occasional lecturer. “Mr. Tremaine is being targeted for his unpopular national socialist views. His writings are non-violent and non-threatening,” says Mr. Fromm. “The government’s determination to lock this dissident up is part of a relentless campaign of censorship of the Internet,” he adds. “Canada is rightly critical of countries like Communist China or Burma which jail dissidents. We stand up for free speech abroad. It’s time we practiced what we preach.,” says Fromm, “ The government’s action is a disgrace and the Canadian Human Rights Commission is a menace to all free men and women,” he charges.

 

FWD: *** RCMP RELEASE DOCUMENTS ON THE CHRC CRIMINAL HACKING INVESTIGATION ***

Written by Paul Fromm

Sunday, 19 July 2009 05:54

*RCMP release documents on the CHRC Criminal Hacking Investigation** * * * *Investigation dropped due to jurisdictional issues with the United States * *And the RCMP investigates Lemire for daring to complain * http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/july18-09_rcmp_access_req.html In late June, 2009, the RCMP responded to an *Access to Information* request filed by human rights activist Marc Lemire<http://www.blogger.com/profile/16073872339991568771>for all documents surrounding the criminal investigation of the Canadian Human Rights Commission and their theft of an innocent woman’s internet connection <http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/CHRC_criminal_complaint.html>. The evidence showing that the CHRC hacked into the internet connection of Nelly Hechme came to light as a result of evidence subpoenaed by Marc Lemire. The evidence was sworn testimony by Alain Monfette from Bell Canada’s Law Enforcement Team<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/CHRC_hacks_wifi.html>and examination of CHRC employees <http://www.freedomsite.org/march25-08/> during a May 2008<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/mar26-08_hearing_wrapup.html>Canadian Human Rights Tribunal hearing. The heavily censored documents released by the RCMP show that the recent statements made by the Canadian Human Rights Commission’s Chief Commissioner Jennifer Lynch were inaccurate and misleading. Lynch wrote<http://www.nationalpost.com/related/topics/story.html?id=1780185>in July 11, 2009’s National Post that “ *Mr. Hiebert says there is uncontradicted expert evidence that a commission employee illegitimately used the Internet connection of a third party. Two independent investigations, one by the RCMP expert unit responsible for computer crimes, and one by the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, found no evidence to support this allegation.*” *Highlights from RCMP Documents * 1. The RCMP found the case to be “*Complete – Unsolved*” 2. The RCMP could not pursue the case because evidence trail lead to the United States where RCMP has no authority and no *MLAT* existed to compel information 3. After a message from CHRC’s lawyer Kathleen Fawcett, the RCMP turned around and *investigated Lemire* for daring to lay the complaint. RCMP censored what the message from CHRC said. 4. As part of the CHRC rebuttal to the charges, they submitted their own copy of the March 2009 Transcript<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/CHRC_submits_fraudulent_transcript_to_RCMP%201_Page_1.jpg>, which has been found to be highly questionable and “missing” key testimony<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/june6-08_CHRC_transcript_tampering.html> . 5. The RCMP found that the distance from the CHRC offices to the WiFi access point of Nelly Hechme was only a mere 400 meters (across an open field) 6. The RCMP saw this investigation as highly political and had multiple printouts from Ezra Levants website, articles from the National Post and other internet websites. 7. Multiple CHRC employees were involved in case and “liaised” with the RCMP. This included the manager of the CHRC’s IT dept. 8. The Ottawa Police reviewed the case, accepted it, and forwarded it to the RCMP, who had more expertise in federal matters. *All RCMP Documents * *[JPEG Images<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/july18-09_rcmp_access_req.html#complete> ] * * [PDF Format<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/Access_Request-RCMP_investigation_of_CHRC.pdf> ]* *Detailed analysis of the RCMP documents* <http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/Occurrence_summary.jpg> [enlarge<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/Occurrence_summary.jpg>] This is the general summary of the RCMP’s investigation of the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Notice the “*Clearance status*” shows the investigation by the RCMP as “*Complete – unsolved*” <http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/Ottawa_Police_forward_complaint_to_RCMP_Page_01.jpg> <http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/Ottawa_Police_forward_complaint_to_RCMP_Page_03.jpg> [enlarge<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/Ottawa_Police_forward_complaint_to_RCMP_Page_01.jpg>] [enlarge<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/Ottawa_Police_forward_complaint_to_RCMP_Page_03.jpg> ] In the summary, the RCMP notes that “*Matter was investigated by OPS [Ottawa Police Service] but follow-up is now done by A Div ITCU [Integrated Technical Crime Unit – RCMP].*” This shows that the Ottawa Police Service investigated the case, accepted it, and sent it onto the Integrated Technical Crime Unit of the RCMP because it involved a Federal Government Agency. At the Ottawa Police Service, the complaint was investigated by *Martin Dompierre<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/Ottawa_Police_forward_complaint_to_RCMP_Page_01.jpg>. Detective/Forensic Examiner. Criminal Investigative Services. High Tech Crime Unit. Ottawa Police Service.* The summary continues: “*Investigation completed as of 2008-11-10 reveals not enough evidence to pursue charges.*” As described in more detail below, the RCMP were not able to use sworn legal affidavits provided by the owner of Stormfront, because the affidavit was not collected pursuant to a Canada / USA “MLAT”, which is a *Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Treaty<http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/dept-min/pub/fps-sfp/fpd/ch43.html#43_2_2> .* “MLAT” agreements with the USA are generally only implemented for serious criminal matters, such as murder, child exploitation or kidnapping, because it involves getting many different agencies involved, including provincial Attorney Generals. <http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/General_Occurrence_Report_Page_5.jpg> [enlarge<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/General_Occurrence_Report_Page_5.jpg> ] During the course of the investigation, the officer met with RCMP lawyer Christine Morris<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/General%20Occurrence%20Report_Page_5.jpg>of IPOC (Integrated Proceeds of Crime division - RCMP) who specializes in multi-jurisdictional investigations. Any MLAT request by the police have to be reviewed and vetted by an IPOC counsel, who then submits it to IAG (*International Assistance Group* - part of the Department of Justice Criminal Law Branch) [See Department of Justice - *The Federal Prosecution Service Handbook* at http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/dept-min/pub/fps-sfp/fpd/ch43.html#43_6_3 ] While the specific recommendations of Morris were censored, it would seem to be that, as a result of that meeting, the affidavit and other sworn legal information provided from the United States were not allowed to be used as evidence in the criminal investigation of the CHRC. <http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/RCMP_Briefing_notes_Page_1.jpg> <http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/RCMP_Briefing_notes_Page_4.jpg> [enlarge<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/RCMP_Briefing_notes_Page_1.jpg>] [enlarge<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/RCMP_Briefing_notes_Page_4.jpg> ] In a RCMP’s “Briefing Note: Theft of telecommunications – CHRC,” the RCMP officer wrote that: “*The information obtained from Marc Lemire were obtained without legal authorization and involved the USA country. To use the evidence, it would require that an MLAT be obtained and executed.*” Thus without that information about the IP address CHRC investigator Dean Steacy (Internet codename: JADEWARR<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/jan16-08_Victory-at-federal-court.html>) used when he accessed the Stormfront website as “Jadewarr”, there was a limited chance of the likelihood of a successful prosecution. *RCMP investigate Marc Lemire for daring to complain about CHRC * One of the most shocking revelations to come out of the RCMP documents is that the RCMP actually investigated Marc Lemire for daring to lay the criminal complaint against the CHRC! <http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/General_Occurrence_Report_Page_6.jpg> [enlarge<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/rcmp_access_req/General_Occurrence_Report_Page_6.jpg> ] Only a few weeks before the RCMP was going to close the case, they received “*a message from Kathleen FAWCETT, lawyer at the CHRXCH*” [Canadian Human Rights Commission]. The contents of the message sent by the CHRC’s lawyer were censored from the report, but the RCMP immediately turned around and investigated Lemire. The report stated “*writer [RCMP Sgt. Stephane Turgeon] requested the assistance of DCAU for a background check of COM LEMIRE, Marc*.” The “DCAU<http://gsg.uottawa.ca/geo/dmti_doc/epoi_v2007.3/epoi_v2007.3.pdf>” is the RCMP’s “*DIVISION CRIMINAL ANALYTICAL UNIT.*”, which performs CPIC checks <http://www.cpic-cipc.ca/pdfs/CPICPVCIPC.pdf> on Canadians. CPIC is an acronym for the *Canadian Police Information Centre*. The RCMP administers this database and says that CPIC “*is a computerized system that provides tactical information about crimes and criminals*.” This is the most highly secure police database in Canada and holds private details on some 10 million Canadians. The CPIC computer has four data banks: Investigative, Identification, Intelligence and Ancillary. Contained in those four data banks are: - *Vehicles*: License information, including validation tags, stolen, abandoned or wanted in connection to a crime. - *Persons*: Persons wanted by the police or accused persons; persons on probation or parole; persons against whom prohibition orders have been placed (e.g. driving, possession of firearms); missing persons, including children; body marks/scars; clothing and dental records or body parts that can be cross-referenced; amnesia, comatose or disaster victims. - *Property*: Stolen guns, articles and securities. - *Marine*: Stolen and abandoned boats and boat motors. - *Dental Characteristics*: Individual dental records (a sub-system of Persons File) - *Canada* *Firearms Registry*: Every Canadian owning a firearm or having a license. Cross-referenced with every gun serial number to registered owner (this alone contains over 10 million records<http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/CPICcolumn.htm>) - *Criminal Records*: Full criminal record information. - *Criminal Record Synopsis*: Condensed version of criminal records supported by fingerprints maintained by the RCMP’s Information and Identification Services. - *CPIC Surveillance*: Contains criminal intelligence information and information on persons, vehicles and boats which are under surveillance. So, what lies did the CHRC spin for the RCMP to do an about-face and parse through Marc Lemire’s most intimate details, which could include information from his dental records to marks/scars to his vehicle information? Unfortunately, the RCMP completely censored what the CHRC’s lawyer said, but based on the CHRC past paranoid ranting on “security,” it is easy to make an educated guess. Through out the entire human rights hearing against Marc Lemire, the CHRC constantly used the sphere of alleged “security threats” to stifle the defence that Lemire was putting up. In order to keep the lid on the CHRC spying operations, they even tried to have Lemire banned from his own hearing, using the fraudulent accusations of “security threats.” [CHRT ruling<http://www.chrt-tcdp.gc.ca/aspinc/search/vhtml-eng.asp?doid=837&lg=_e&isruling=1>– Para 15-17] CHRC lawyers – spinning tales of threats and imaginary security breaches – used this tactic as a way to block hundreds of questions by invoking “national security” and Section 37 of the Canada Evidence Act<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/june11-07_chrc_abuses_section_37.html>, which stopped dead all answers to questions. Looking back now, it is clear that the CHRC invoked Section 37 to cover up their abuse and misdeeds. It had nothing to due with security at all. For instance, the CHRC invoked Section 37 to stop all questions about the “Jadewarr” account, which was used by CHRC employees to infiltrate websites and post messages. The CHRC screamed *security! Security! Security!* over any questions about “Jadewarr”. Now that the answers have been revealed, the utter abuses of “security” claims are clear and documented. The CHRC have used false claims of “security” so often – to hide everything they were doing – even the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal became disgusted by their abusive behavior. In 2008, the Tribunal chastised the CHRC for their numerous groundless claims of “security.” The Tribunal ruled<http://www.chrt-tcdp.gc.ca/aspinc/search/vhtml-eng.asp?doid=892&lg=_e&isruling=1>that: “*[9] The outcome of the *[Marc Lemire’s Federal Court Appeal <http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/jan16-08_Victory-at-federal-court.html>to] *s. 37 matter gives me pause to question the soundness of the Commission's invocation of public security concerns with respect to the testimony of these witnesses*.” The Canadian Human Rights Commission is shameless and has proven in the past, they are willing to do and say anything to protect their censorship franchise. Is it really hard to believe that the CHRC would call up the RCMP and spin some imaginary tale of terror, in order to throw the RCMP off their dirty corrupt scent? Or perhaps the CHRC could just sign onto to one of the many websites they have memberships on and post a “violent threat” themselves, then use it as justification to get Lemire. It all might sound pretty conspiratorial... *BUT* the CHRC does have a proven track record of calling up police agencies and having them investigate people who dare to file complaints<http://ezralevant.com/2008/03/how-the-canadian-human-rights.html>against them or their friends. Perhaps the CHRC was trying to stop the 9 months straight of negative publicity they were receiving as a result of being under the cloud of a criminal investigation? By having the RCMP do the dirty, and investigate every detail of Lemire’s life in hopes that they might find something. After all, it would have been a great *coup de grace* to have Lemire charged with some criminal offence in the end. Then Jennifer Lynch and her cronies could do their usual finger wagging diversion and point to Lemire and say, “see he’s the criminal... not us!” On an interesting side note, if Lemire was a criminal or corrupt, he would easily be able to get a nice cushy job at the CHRC in the future<http://ezralevant.com/2008/04/too-corrupt-for-the-real-polic.html>… After all, the CHRC and ethics don’t mix<http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=1772629> . For background information on the hacking allegations made against the CHRC and the criminal complaint filed with the RCMP, please see: - March 26/08: *CHRC Operatives Hack Unsecured Wireless Access point to Post Hate Messages!<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/CHRC_hacks_wifi.html> * - March 26/08: *Lid Blown Off Commission Internet Spying in Lemire Case*<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/mar26-08_hearing_wrapup.html> - May 17/08: *UPDATE: on Criminal Complaint against Canadian Human Rights Commission for Stealing innocent woman's internet connection<http://blog.freedomsite.org/2008/05/update-on-criminal-complaint-against.html> * - April 18/08: *Privacy Act<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/CHRC_privacy_complaint.html>complaint filed against Canadian “Human Rights” Commission for unauthorized use of an Internet connection<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/CHRC_privacy_complaint.html> * - April 10/08: *Motion for Disclosure of CHRC fake names and to reopen hearing over CHRC WiFi Hacking<http://blog.freedomsite.org/2008/04/motion-for-disclosure-of-chrc-fake.html> * - June 6/08: *CHRC Transcript Irregularities<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/june6-08_CHRC_transcript_tampering.html> * <http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/june6-08_CHRC_transcript_tampering.html> [See YouTube video here <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bG9P1UQfHxA>] - Nov 21/08: *Criminal Complaint against CHRC: Evidence leads to the USA, where the RCMP can’t follow up. RCMP won't investigate further<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/nov21-08_RCMP_criminal_complaint_against_CHRC.html> * - Jan 30/09: *Privacy Commissioner rules on CHRC WiFi Hacking Allegations after a shockingly poor investigation<http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/jan30-09_privacy_office_drops_complaint.html> * Link: http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/july18-09_rcmp_access_req.html

 

THE GREAT DRYWALL OF CHINA

Written by Paul Fromm

Sunday, 19 July 2009 05:42

*The Great Drywall of China* Editorial in *Chicago Tribune*, July 16, 2009 www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/chi-0716edit2jul16,0,7626609.story chicagotribune.com * Danger: Chinese goods* July 16, 2009 *During the height of the housing boom, American home builders began to rely heavily on imported Chinese drywall. Domestic supplies couldn't keep up with demand, and imported drywall looked like a godsend. It has turned into a nightmare. Chinese drywall is the suspected cause for persistent foul smells in homes, for corrosion of metals and jewelry and for respiratory problems. The problem has been concentrated in south Florida, where the devastation wrought by Hurricanes Katrina and Wilma in 2005 prompted huge demand for building materials. But the Consumer Product Safety Commission has received complaints from hundreds of homeowners in 19 states and the District of Columbia who say they're victims. U.S. imports of Chinese drywall peaked in 2006 at 503 million pounds, enough for 32,000 homes. The Florida Department of Health is investigating, as is the federal safety commission. At least two home builders are replacing drywall they installed, even relocating homeowners while the work is done. We're talking about a massive job here. Buyers, beware of Chinese goods. Consumers worldwide have been reminded of this many times in recent years. -- In 2002, the U.S. and the European Union temporarily banned the import of Chinese honey, which was laced with a widely banned antibiotic. -- In 2006, Chinese-made cough syrup was mixed with an industrial solvent before it was shipped to Panama, where it killed at least 100 people. -- In 2007, Chinese factories shipped toys with excessive lead, tires with faulty valve stems and pet food laced with melamine to the U.S. -- In 2008, retailers around the world removed processed foods containing Chinese milk or milk powder from shelves after the products were found to be contaminated by melamine. Through it all, many Chinese manufacturers have turned their backs on pleas to improve their quality control. And now, there's the drywall debacle. Ding Dawu, a Chinese geoscientist, told the Los Angeles Timesthat some Chinese drywall plants made their plasterboard entirely out of phosphogypsum -- a radioactive phosphorous substance that is banned in U.S. construction. One industry insider told the Times that he believed 80 percent of Chinese drywall manufacturers used phosphogypsum, which has no restrictions in China. Phosphogypsum is so abundant and cheap that it's given away to anyone who will pay hauling costs. The Chinese drywall was far less expensive than the American product. Howard Ehrsam, a Florida-based home inspector, told ABC News that Chinese drywall sold for as little as $3 a sheet, while the price for American drywall reached $22 a sheet. A bargain -- until you figure in the health risks and the cost of removing the shoddy, dangerous stuff. China has yet to suffer serious consequences from the time-after-time production of bad products. But it seems inevitable that there will be consequences. Consumers don't take well to being poisoned. Chinese goods are earning a reputation for shoddiness that will be hard to shake. Copyright © 2009, Chicago Tribune *