Political Prisoner Terry Tremaine Won’t Spend Christmas in Prison

Written by Paul Fromm

Wednesday, 28 November 2012 01:37

*Political Prisoner Terry Tremaine Won’t Spend Christmas in Prison* * * *REGINA. November 26, 2012. * Political prisoner Terry Tremaine will not be spending this Christmas in prison and his tormenter for the past seven years, Richard Warman, will not be getting a fat roll of cash in his Christmas stocking, as per a court ordered judgement, to cover his expenses, in this matter, for seeking serious punishment for Mr. Tremaine. In a telephone conference today with Mr. Tremaine’s lawyer Douglas Christie, Federal Court of Appeals Judge Denis Pelletier granted Mr. Christie’s motion for a stay of sentence and for an appeal against the sentence. Canadian Human Rights Commission lawyer Daniel Poulin had been seeking a writ of committal to immediately send Mr. Tremaine to prison. In a November 7 sentencing decision Federal Court Judge Sean Harrington ordered Mr. Tremaine to prison for a month beginning 15 days after service of his decision. He ordered a further six months in prison should Mr. Tremaine not remove a large number of postings from his website that displeased chronic complainant Warman. Further, this penniless man, who lost his employment as a university lecturer due to a complaint by Mr. Warman, was ordered to pay the Commission’s costs and Mr. Warman’s disbursements for the sentencing hearing. Mr.Tremaine, when interviewed by CAFÉ, was elated that Judge Pelletier ruled the appeal will be *de novo*. That is, issues not raised at the original contempt of court case or at the appeal can be raised as well as issues not dealt with specifically at either hearing. Among many key issues outstanding is the nature of communication. When Mr. Tremaine posted on his own website in the U.S., which enjoys the 1stAmendment that guarantees free speech, was this not private storage of data? Only when someone, say a person like Richard Warman looking to be offended, scoured the Internet, made many choices, came to Mr. Tremaine’s website and selected something that offended him and then brought it back to Canada, did communication occur.

 

Anti-terrorism experts say lone white supremacists are the biggest threat in Canada

Written by Paul Fromm

Sunday, 25 November 2012 05:23

Anti-terrorism experts say lone white supremacists are the biggest threat in Canada Canada's foremost free speech attorney Douglas H. Christie has, for more than 20 years, identified the pattern used by Canada's repressive establishment:L "Demonize, isolate, criminalize." Usually with the compliance and connivance of a leftist, impressionable and profoundly ignorant press, the police or groups bent on railroading a freethinker starts the name calling --"white supremacist", "racist", "anti-Semite", "extremist." People seldom examine the substance of the name calling, Just what is a White supremacist? Those of us who oppose the Third World invasion don't seek to impose White or European values on China or Haiti or India. We simply don't want to be overwhelmed. However, the demonization and name calling are effective,especially as the mantra tends to be repeated. As the media defamation heats up, real friends tend to withdraw, potential friends and supporters hold back. After all, do they want the same treatment - the name calling, the defamation? Now, the victim is demonized and isolated. The final step is the laying of criminal charges or the suggestion that the dissident is somehow a criminal. "When Const. Curtis Rind pulled over a man without a valid driver’s licence during a routine traffic stop, he didn’t expect the man to start arguing that it was his god-given right to use the road. But the man was part of an emerging group of domestic terrorists that police have been notified to be on the look out for because of their anti-government beliefs.They’re called “freeman” or “sovereign citizens,” and basically believe the law doesn’t apply to them, and they shouldn’t have to pay taxes, Rind said. Rind, an officer in southwest division, first learned about freeman citizens a few years ago through notices and information bulletins circulating throughout the police service. In the last six months, Rind said freeman citizens have increased their presence in the city and now seem to be all over the place." *(Edmonton Sun*, November 7, 2012) This Const. Rind is a dangerous ignoramus. He was outraged that some mere citizen, who pays his exorbitant salary, actually believes he has "rights" and that driving isn't some state-given "privilege." They may be dissenters, they may be oddballs, but they are not terrorists, if "terrorist" means using extreme violence to further their political goals. Ever since 9/11, many police and even rent-a-cops and airport security types have begun acting like Rambos on steroids, snarling, throwing their weight around and seeking to intimidate any mere citizen who doesn't act like a submissive sheep/ It gets worse. The* Sun* report continued: "Anti-terrorism expert John Bain said police should be keeping a close eye on. Speaking at an anti-terrorism workshop Wednesday, Bain explained the different types of terrorists that range from “freedom fighters” such as Osama bin Laden and eco-terrorists such as Wiebo Ludwig, to religious and other extremist groups like white supremacists.At this time, it’s the white supremacist groups that Bain believes poses the biggest threat to Canadian safety." So "White supremacists" are the biggest danger to Canada's security. In the past 30 years, how many people have been killed by White Nationalists in Canada? To my knowledge, NONE.. "Terrorism" is almost entirely the result of poorly screened immigration. Sikh radicals blew up the Air India plane whose flight originated in Vancouver. Over 300 people died. They killed several Sikh "moderates" in their own community, including journalist Inderjit Singh Hayer. A radical Moslem immigrant Ahmed Ressam from Montreal was caught on his way to Los Angeles to blow up LAX in 2000. His name was Ressam. There are many radical Moslems in Canada. AN MP told me some years ago he knew that upper scale Moslems in a local mosque were cheering as the planes hit the World Trade Centre. But this "expert" informs the foolish and the impressionable that it is "White supremacists" and freemen who are the real terrorists! Outrageous! *Paul Fromm* *Director* *CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION* By Pamela Roth <http://www.edmontonsun.com/author/pamela-roth> ,Edmonton Sun First posted: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 06:35 PM MST | Updated: Thursday, November 08, 2012 10:25 AM MST [image: John Bain anti-terrorism] John Bain conducts an anti-terrorism seminar as part of a four-day Advanced Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design course offered to the public by the Edmonton Police Service at the Kingsway AMA branch in Edmonton, Alberta, on November 7, 2012. IAN KUCERAK/EDMONTON SUN/QMI AGENCY <http://www.edmontonsun.com/2012/11/07/anti-terrorism-experts-say-lone-white-supremacists-are-the-biggest-threat-in-canada#> - Change text size for the story<http://www.edmontonsun.com/2012/11/07/anti-terrorism-experts-say-lone-white-supremacists-are-the-biggest-threat-in-canada#> - Print this story<http://www.edmontonsun.com/2012/11/07/anti-terrorism-experts-say-lone-white-supremacists-are-the-biggest-threat-in-canada#> Report an error <http://www.edmontonsun.com/contact-us#story> Related Stories When Const. Curtis Rind pulled over a man without a valid driver’s licence during a routine traffic stop, he didn’t expect the man to start arguing that it was his god-given right to use the road. But the man was part of an emerging group of domestic terrorists that police have been notified to be on the look out for because of their anti-government beliefs. They’re called “freeman” or “sovereign citizens,” and basically believe the law doesn’t apply to them, and they shouldn’t have to pay taxes, Rind said. Rind, an officer in southwest division, first learned about freeman citizens a few years ago through notices and information bulletins circulating throughout the police service. In the last six months, Rind said freeman citizens have increased their presence in the city and now seem to be all over the place. “When you engage with these individuals in conversation, they quickly make it known who they are and what they’re about. They try to explain that we’re breaching their rights,” said Rind, noting some of them have scripted notes they’ve practiced and explain to officers that they’re impeding their freedom to move freely throughout the country. Some even spout common law from the 1800s. “It can be a little off-putting as a police officer because almost 98% of the people we deal with understand why they’ve been stopped and are usually apologetic and easy to deal with. These guys go 180 degrees in the opposite direction.” It’s extremists such as this that international anti-terrorism expert John Bain said police should be keeping a close eye on. Speaking at an anti-terrorism workshop Wednesday, Bain explained the different types of terrorists that range from “freedom fighters” such as Osama bin Laden and eco-terrorists such as Wiebo Ludwig, to religious and other extremist groups like white supremacists. At this time, it’s the white supremacist groups that Bain believes poses the biggest threat to Canadian safety. “You have Islamic extremists and religious extremists — you have a whole mixture in this country, but I think one of the things that has not come on the top yet are white supremacists. They are dangerous to society and they always will be,” said Bain, noting people that are “lone wolves” are more dangerous than an extremist group. “You can follow an extremist group. You can’t follow a lone wolf because you never know what they are going to do. They are acting individually on their own ideology.” Canada has been no stranger to domestic and international terrorist attacks that have hit close to home. In January 1965, a left-wing radical group bombed three American war planes being retrofitted at an Edmonton airport. Security guard Threnton James Richardson was bound, gagged and shot with a rifle when the perpetrator entered the airport. Two F-84 jets were destroyed and a third was heavily damaged by the bombing. An unemployed German immigrant, Harry Waldeman Freidrich, was arrested by police and charged with Richardson’s murder. Between October 2008 and July 2009, six natural gas pipelines owned by Encana were bombed near Dawson Creek, B.C. after letters were sent to local newspapers opposing the gas industry. And during the 1960s and ’70s, groups opposing the Cuban government began targeting Cuban property in Montreal and Ottawa with bombs and a bazooka. Bain said Canada is vulnerable to terrorism for a number of reasons. Open sources on the Internet show there are lots of people living in Canada with ties to terrorist organizations, said Bain, but they aren’t the ones carrying out the bombings. Instead, they are the computer scientists, engineers and doctors that are doing all the leg work and planning for the attacks. The four-day workshop, entitled Advanced Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED), is offered to the public by the Edmonton Police Service. [email protected]

 

A Brief Analysis of Criminal Code 319(2)(3)

Written by Paul Fromm

Saturday, 24 November 2012 04:38

** A Brief Analysis of Criminal Code 319(2)(3) Tweet <https://twitter.com/share> RYLEY, Alberta, Canada, November 15, 2012, by Reni Sentana-Ries All of the comments on Canada’s hate law 319(2) are my personal opinions on this sordid matter and should not be taken as legal advice. And now for the bomb shell on this stinking issue: *REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE MAJORITY JUDGES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA HAVE DECREED FROM THEIR HIGH AND EXALTED POSITIONS AS GODS OF SUPPOSED JUSTICE, CRIMINAL CODE 319(2) IS NOT ONLY CONTRAVENING THE CONSTITUTION, BUT IN ITSELF IS A CONTRADICTORY GARBLED PIECE OF WRIT DEVOID OF LOGIC, WORSE THAN WHAT GRADE 4 STUDENTS CAN COME UP WITH! *And here is why: Subsection (2) says:* Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against an identifiable group is guilty of...* BUT... Subsection (3a) says: *No person shall be convicted of an offence under subsection (2)* (a) *if he establishes that the statements communicated were true;* *Do you notice the departure from fundamental British Common Law built on the presumption of innocence, where the burden of proof must rest with the prosecution?* Why then do we find a sudden reversal of that principle by the writers of this particular law, where it is now the task of the defendant to prove that he or she is innocent? The Supreme Court should have long ago discovered this irregularity in the law and struck it down for that reason alone. But alas,* it was imposed on the people for a political purpose, and that purpose is to effectively conceal information of subversive nature which some individuals or groups have involved themselves in, and the bearers of such news they believe should be silenced. *Controlled official news outlets will never tell you that, for if they did, their managers and reporters would all be instantly fired for telling the truth. If the “burden of proof” were on the prosecution to prove that the “communicated statements” are lies, then they simply could not do so on truthful information, and instantly lose their case. And so we find that Canada’s justice system has abandoned the Common Law principle and reversed it to make it impossible for the accused to prove his of her statements truthful. Even if it were possible, the judge could simply say: “I don’t believe you.” Then what? The case is lost for the defendant and the guillotine of a conviction is coming down. NEXT... A conviction under this law is forbidden where the statements cover a religious subject. 3(b) *if, in good faith, he expressed or attempted to establish by argument an opinion on a religious subject;* I am in agreement with this statement. NEXT... Qualifier (c) has in all convictions of people under this law been ignored by judges as well as jurors.* No one may be convicted if...* *3(c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed them to be true; or...* All persons ever charged under Criminal Code 319(2) have in all cases believed their public statements to be true. Defenders of free speech do not go public with information they know not to be true. They are also not interested in publishing slander which falls into a different category of law, where the issue of “hate” is not a central focus of the case. It is therefore my opinion that* IT IS THEORETICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANYONE TO BE CONVICTED UNDER THIS SECTION OF CANADA’S LAW, UNLESS A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE OCCURS WHERE SUBSECTION 3(c) IS BEING IGNORED BY JUDGES, OR JURORS, OR BOTH!* *AND A LAW WHERE IN THEORY NO CONVICTION IS EVER POSSIBLE BECAUSE THE WAY IT IS WRITTEN, IS THEREFORE IN ITSELF ULTRA VIRES, NULL AND VOID, AND THEREFORE ALSO UNCONSTITUTIONAL!* *Clause 3(c) of Criminal Code 319 makes every conviction a blatant miscarriage of justice. * Friends, we can read. This section needs no lawyer or judge to explain to us what it means. We can see it for ourselves: *NO HONEST JUDGE CAN CONVICT THE ACCUSED OF “WILFULLY PROMOTING HATRED” ON STATEMENTS THE ACCUSED BELIEVED TO BE TRUE! AND NO JUDGE HAS EVER ASKED THE DEFENDANT WHETHER HE OR SHE BELIEVED IN HIS OR HER OWN STATEMENTS, FOR IF HE EVER DID, THE JUDGE, UPON HEARING THE REPLY IN THE POSITIVE, WOULD BE COMPELLED TO RULE THE ACCUSED ACQUITTED! * But is such simple procedure actually happening? No, because all cases in this phoney arena are politically driven and decided upon - not of what is true or untrue - but on what is politically correct and what is not.* CC 319(2) destroys lives, is unconstitutional, contentious, ultra vires in its internal contradiction, used as witch hunt tool to silence speakers of truth, and was designed primarily for sheltering people involved in underhanded activity to spare them public exposure.* Anyone ever accused of breaking this law raises issues in...* “statements (which) were relevant to any subject of public interest, (and) the discussion of which was for the public benefit,”* believed them to be true; then where is the offence? It simply does not exist, and* any conviction is a miscarriage of justice - even under the law the way it stands now!* How can a law be valid when a conviction is impossible to achieve the way it was written in the first place? Only where judges and jurors are dishonest can the accused be convicted, a situation which then by its own gravity slides into a miscarriage of justice for every case. Besides all that - what is hate? Hate is a human emotion belonging to everyone for everyone is capable of it. If "hate" may no longer become expressed in speech or in words, then how in heavens name can we even begin to fix the problems this world is in today? The battle connnected to "hate" is a battle between good and evil; and we permit no one to prevent us from participating in it with words - whether spoken or written - to assure ourselves that good will always remain victorious over evil. Unless the attitude among politicians, lawyers, judges, prosecutors, and jurors change, and all involved in the “administration of justice” recognise the flaws in this legislation, I personally hold no hope of a successful conclusion for the gentleman currently being harassed in British Columbia by the same perverse law of C.C. 319(2) as my trust in the integrity of judges has been destroyed a long time ago.