Terry Tremaine: Canada's Least Wanted Political Prisoner
Written by Paul Fromm
Friday, 23 November 2012 04:45
*Terry Tremaine: Canada's Least Wanted Political Prisoner*

*REGINA*. Canada's latest political prisoner, former university lecturer
and Internet blogger Terry Tremaine presented himself both to the Regina
Police and the courts to turn himself in pursuant to a November 7 sentence
handed down by Federal Judge Sean Harrington.

Mr. Tremaine was to begin a one month sentence, 15 days after being served
notice of his sentence. On his lawyer Doug Christie's instructions, Mr.
Tremaine tried to surrender himself to begin his sentence today.

So, despite the vitriol poured on him by Judge Harrington, Mr. Tremaine is
the ultimate law-abiding citizen, except that he believes in freedom of
speech. He turned himself in but none of the servants of the Beast knew
anything about him or wanted him!

At the police station, Mr. Tremaine recounts, "the officer on the desk
checked his data base and the RCMP data base for warrants. There were
none." The officer suggested that the warrant would not be issued until
tomorrow and it might take a week or more to execute.

Mr. Tremaine was not unhappy about another night of freedom.

"Then I went to the provincial court and talked to the desk clerk and
sheriff deputies. They too searched for a warrant with my name on it," he
explains. Here things were grimmer. "Although I had turned myself in and
they had no record of me," says soon-to-be political prisoner Terry
Tremaine, "I was put in detention. The processing took longer than their
search for a warrant." After about 20 minutes, Mr. Tremaine was released.

Tyrannies can often be comical in a bizarre way. Mr. Tremaine was given a
receipt for his property while he was detained. "The date on the receipt,"
he reports, "is October 29, 2012 -- nine days before sentence was even

Pursuant to the judge's thought-gagging order, Mr. Tremaine has removed a
number of postings from his website and written to
where he posted as *"mathdoktor99"* and asked them to remove certain posts
that upset Canada's thought police.

Mr. Tremaine expresses cautious optimism that he may not have to be in jail
over Christmas. His lawyer Douglas Christie is filing notice of appeal
against both the conviction and the sentence. "My lawyer will argue a bail
application in Federal Court next Wednesday," Mr. Tremaine told CAFE

Mr. Tremaine is outraged at being sent to jail. The system is vindictive
and treats a thought dissident far more harshly than a thug. "If you're
convicted of drunk driving, you don't do time until after your third or
fourth conviction," says the writer and webmaster who has never been
convicted of any crime in Canada. He notes that, as in most totalitarian
states, the thought criminals are treated worst of all.

Judge Harrington admitted the tyrannical anti-free speech bias of the
Canadian judicial system when he warned Terry Tremaine in his sentence: "He
must remember that freedom has its price."
Mediation in the Lemire Case: The Federal Court gets it all wrong
Written by Paul Fromm
Thursday, 22 November 2012 08:05
This email newsletter was sent to you in graphical HTML format.
If you're seeing this version, your email program prefers plain text emails.
You can read the original version online:

The Marc Lemire Internet Free Speech Case -- Part 2

Mediation in the Lemire Case: The Federal Court gets it all wrong
The FreedomSite Blog: Mediation in the Lemire Case: The Federal Court
gets it all wrong (

In the recent bizarre ruling of the Federal Court in the Marc Lemire
case (
) – where a Justice of the Federal Court upheld the completely
discredited Section 13 of the Canadian “Human Rights” Act (
http://www.stopsection13.com/ ) – The Justice also further claimed
that the Tribunal’s clear and decisive ruling (
) was incorrect with respect to mediation. Since the ruling, Richard
Warman has taken to one of the websites he posts on to claim he was
‘extremely pleased’ with the courts finding that “repeated
efforts were made by the Commission and Richard Warman to engage Marc
Lemire in mediation or negotiation but these were always refused by
Lemire because he would not accept a cease and desist order as part of
any settlement. (para 60)”

Senior adjudicator Athanasios Hadjis of the Canadian Human Rights
Tribunal looked at the mediation quite extensively in the Lemire case,
and found that (
http://chrt-tcdp.gc.ca/search/files/t1073_5405chrt26.pdf ): “Mr.
Lemire repeatedly asked formally through his legal counsel for an
opportunity to mediate or conciliate a settlement to the complaint, to
no avail…” [para 284] and further that “As I have pointed out
several times in this decision, Mr. Lemire had not only “amended”
his conduct by removing the impugned material, but sought conciliation
and mediation as soon as he learned of the complaint against him. The
process understood by the Supreme Court was not what Mr. Lemire
experienced.” [para 289]

The Federal Court said that: “In this instance, the Member accepted
Mr. Lemire’s contention that the complainant and the Commission
declined to mediate or conciliate a settlement to the complaint. This
is not borne out by the record of the Tribunal proceedings. Repeated
efforts were made to engage Mr. Lemire in mediating or negotiating a
settlement of the complaint. However, they were conditional on
Lemire’s acceptance of a cease and desist order, which he refused to
accept.” [para 60]

But who is correct, the Federal Court who reviewed the matter [in a
ONE DAY hearing], or the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal who reviewed
the Lemire case for close to four years, across close to 30 days of
evidence and hearings?

Here is just one of the many documents I have on the mediation issue.
I have plenty more, but these documents really underline how the
entire process worked against me. It was a punitive process which in
itself was the real punishment (
) of the entire hearing.

On September 20, 2005, when the Marc Lemire case was referred to the
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal for a hearing, one of the very first
letters the Tribunal sent was to request mediation of the case. The
Tribunal stated: “Before planning the actual inquiry, the Tribunal
is offering mediation, on consent of all parties, in an attempt to
achieve a settle of this matter. If the parties are of the view that
mediation would be of assistance, the Tribunal Chairperson will
designate a member of the Canadian human Rights Tribunal to meet with
the parties to help in negotiations to resolve the complaints. As
Counsel for the respondent [Marc Lemire] in these proceedings, our
Mediation Procedures are enclosed for your review, to assist you in
making this decision.”

A mere three days later, Marc Lemire’s lawyer – Barbara Kulaszka
– immediately responded by saying “Mr. Lemire agrees to mediation
in the above-noted complaints by Mr. Warman in English. I propose that
the mediation take place in the cities of Bellville, Kingston and
Toronto, listed in order of preference.”

Unlike the questionable ruling by the Federal Court, or any other
claims, there was NO “precondition” of anything. Marc Lemire
agreed to mediation before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal,
immediately and unreserved. The quote above is the entire letter from
Marc Lemire’s courageous lawyer, Barbara Kulaszaka. There was no
precondition, or any refusal to accept a “cease and desist” order.

And who turned down the mediation before the Canadian Human Rights

On September 30, 2005, Gregory Smith, Registrar of the Canadian Human
Rights Tribunal sent us a letter, wherein he stated: “In response to
our letter dated September 20, 2005, inquiring whether the parties
were interested in having the above-noted case mediation, I am now
writing to confirm that mediation has been declined by the
Complainant[Richard Warman]. Therefore, this case will now proceed to

Here is the entire letter, in case you think I might have left
something out. Just click on each image to enlarge it:

The Federal Court was totally wrong. I did not put preconditions on
the mediation, and for those that wish to praise the Federal Court for
this incorrect ruling, should really review the documents posted in
this email, and think again about who turned down mediation from day

Can you say … “Maximum Disruption (
http://ezralevant.com/2009/09/minimal-impairment-vs-maximum.html )”?

-Marc Lemire

Can I count on you to support the cause of freedom and rid Canada of
this disgusting though control legislation? My courageous lawyer
Barbara Kulaszka and I have demonstrated what two dedicated freedom
fighters can accomplish against overwhelming odds. We have
single-handedly and doggedly fought the system and exposed the corrupt
underbelly of the "Human Rights" Commission's racket. Nothing ever
comes easy when you are fighting such fanatical censors. This case is
a seminal one, where the outcome will have serious implications on our
right to think and speak freely in this country for generations to
come. All Canadians will benefit when we manage to get this shameful
law expunged from our legal books.

I cannot carry on this important fight alone. Your donations literally
equal the survival of this case.

You can contact me here:

Marc Lemire
762 Upper James St
Suite 384
Hamilton, Ontario
L9C 3A2

Email: [email protected]
Web: http://www.freedomsite.org ( http://www.freedomsite.org/
)http://www.StopSection13.com ( http://www.stopsection13.com/ )
Twitter: @marc_lemire ( http://twitter.com/marc_lemire )

Unsubscribe / Change Profile: http://ymlp255.net/ugmjhqsqgsgbbqghhbgguewwmw
Powered by YourMailingListProvider
Radical Press Legal Update #3 -- Another Adjournment
Written by Paul Fromm
Thursday, 22 November 2012 08:02
This email newsletter was sent to you in graphical HTML format.
If you're seeing this version, your email program prefers plain text emails.
You can read the original version online:

Radical Press Legal Update #3 ( http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=1428 )
-- Another Adjournment

Dear Reader,
In my last update I erroneously informed people that my next
appearance scheduled for Tuesday, November 20th, 2012 would be an
actual court appearance. In fact, as it turned out, it wasn’t.

Instead I went to the Judicial Case Manager’s office next to the
court room and there met with a Justice of the Peace who, upon my
arrival, proceeded to telephone my lawyer Doug Christie in Victoria,
B.C. in order to discuss setting up some dates in the future when a
Preliminary hearing would occur.

In my previous appearance on November 11, 2012 Doug Christie advised
Judge Morgan that it would likely take at least one week in order for
him to question those who had produced the Information to obtain a
search warrant which resulted in the seizure of all my computers and
my firearms. The people responsible for this are Det-Cst Terry Wilson
and his partner Cst Normandie Levas of the BC Hate Crime Team located
in Surrey, B.C. Doug is of course contesting this document as he has
already stated to the court that it is illegal under the Criminal Code
for the RCMP to gain a search warrant for such purposes in the case of
a Section 319(2) CC charge.

As discussions began it quickly became apparent to the Justice that
the file on this case which she had was not fully complete and that
missing documents were preventing the Justice from being able to get a
clear picture of precisely what was happening and what was expected in
terms of times required.

As a result the Justice was forced to adjourn the setting of dates for
another week (to November 27, 2012) by which time she hoped to be able
to discuss the situation with Judge Morgan and then provide direction
to both Crown and Defence as to what was required in terms of
documentation prior to going ahead with setting any dates for the
upcoming proceedings.

One point of interest though was the fact that the Justice indicated
that because of the length of time required by defence to challenge
the validity of the search warrant that it would not be possible for
it to take place until at least July of 2013.

The additional issue of Crown Council wishing to impose the original
gag order on me regarding bail conditions also wasn’t addressed nor
times set because of missing documentation which the Justice required.
There will likely be more on this after the November 27th meeting.

That’s all folks! (for now)

Arthur Topham
RadicalPress.com ( http://radicalpress.com/ )

Please consider helping me in this battle if you can by sending a
financial donation my way either by PayPal ( see my PayPal button on
my blog ( http://www.quesnelcariboosentinel.com/
)http://www.quesnelcariboosentinel.com ) or else by snail mail to:

Arthur Topham
4633 Barkerville Highway
Quesnel, B.C. V2J 6T8

The outcome of this case will have repercussions that go far beyond
just my own situation with respect to our collective right to Freedom
of Speech on the Internet.

Unsubscribe / Change Profile: http://ymlp255.net/ugmjhqsqgsgbbqghhjgguewwmw
Powered by YourMailingListProvider
Page 136 of 454
Powered by MMS Blog