Peg Leg Shankar, the Tamil Tiger People Smuggler versus The RCMP Keystone Cops

Written by Paul Fromm

Tuesday, 31 May 2011 04:32

*Peg Leg Shankar, the Tamil Tiger People Smuggler versus The RCMP Keystone Cops* Is it just incompetence or is the entire Canadian political establishment dedicated to allowing illegals to wholesale invade this country? At every turn, the idleness and incompetence of those investigating the first shipload -- the Tamil Tiger probe -- of illegals (the *Ocean Lady*) staggers one's mind. The RCMP, good at tasering to death a confused Polish immigrant, seemed unequal to investigating the 76 dusky denizens of the Ocean Lady. The Mounties had little knowledge of geography and, at times, relied on interpreters over the phone from other cities. Despite all the interviews with these illegals who were clearly up to no good -- why would anyone pay $40,000 to be snuck into Canada, if they could legitimately seek refugee status at Canada's embassy in Thailand or Indonesia or Sri Lanka? -- all 76 were released from custody, await their leisurely hearings to determine "refugee" status and, all the while, feast off the Canadian taxpayer. And, yes, somewhere in Asia, a Tamil Tiger operative named "Peg Leg Shankar" must be smirking at our hapless defences: "Formerly called the *Sea Queen*, and before that the *Princess Easwary, the Ocean Lady* was allegedly organized by Shanmugasundaram Kanthaskaran, also known as Peg Leg Shankar, a one-legged former Tamil Tigers rebel wanted on an Interpol warrant for human smuggling.: "RCMP investigation into a freighter that arrived off the west coast in 2009 carrying 76 illegal migrants, saying that interviews were 'poorly done,' seized documents were not translated and that the analysis of evidence was 'rudimentary.' In a highly unusual memo, Crown prosecutors wrote a strongly worded critique of Project E-Panurgic, the RCMP’s investigation of the human smuggling ship *MV Ocean Lady*. The memo points to page after page of 'problems,deficiencies' and 'areas which require improvement before a prosecution can proceed.' 'Our overall impression is that the RCMP wanted to get through the interviews as quickly as possible with little thought as to what was being achieved in the process,' the memo says, 'there was minimal preparation for the interviews, no co-ordination such that when significant facts arose in one interview, these facts could be canvassed in other interviews, and no follow up whatsoever.' The memo explains why, more than a year-and-a-half after the *Ocean Lady*was seized off Vancouver Island, no criminal charges have yet been laid in connection with the human smuggling operation, which began in Indonesia and Thailand. Although it stands to reason that at least some of those on board would have been involved, all are living freely around Toronto. A copy of the memo was obtained by the *National Post." (National Post*, May 10, 2011) The catalogue of incompetence and ineptitude is depressing: "'Most of the RCMP interviewers lacked a basic knowledge of the geography of Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia, and were confused as to the location of major cities, such as Colombo, Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur and Singapore,' the memo says. 'At the very least, the interviewers could have brought a map.…Important facts” that arose during interviews were not followed up, the memo continues. When interviewees mentioned other migrants, they were not shown photos to verify exactly whom they were talking about. Also, while the captain kept a journal in Tamil, it was not translated. Neither was a journal kept by another passenger. Since only two local translators were available, interviews had to be conducted using translators in other cities who interpreted over the telephone. And instead of police asking a question and having the translator repeat it in Tamil, the officers told translators “ask the migrant about this.' As the memo says: 'The interviewer should be asking the questions, not the translator.'” The Mounties' investigation may have been slack, but their recommendations were solid: "The RCMP spent a year on the *Ocean Lady* investigation before sending its case to prosecutors in Vancouver on Oct. 21, 2010. Police had recommended charges against a dozen of those found on the ship. But instead of approving the charges, Crown lawyers rebuked the Mounties and sent the case back for a significant amount of follow-up." The fact is the entire shipload should have been charged. All had paid upwards of $40,000 U.S. to be smuggled into Canada. They were not innocent "victims." They were like drug addicts buying drugs from a pusher. All are committing a crime. If Canada's political establishment were really serious about their feigned outrage at "people smuggling," they'd back up their outrage with prosecutions. Both the illegals and the smugglers are criminals. All through the *National Post* report, we read of the sickening secrecy that keeps the Canadian taxpayers in the dark and shields the illegals: * "Investigators were not allowed to ask Sri Lanka for assistance, since they had been given ''very specific direction' from RCMP headquarters in Ottawa not to disclose the migrants’ identities to Colombo." * "Federal prosecutors wrote in the memo that three of the men could be charged. They cannot be named because of a publication ban imposed by the IRB but include the man in charge of the boat, the chief engineer and the captain. All three were in the wheelhouse when the *Ocean Lady* was intercepted." The whole sorry mess emphasizes once again the necessity of using the "notwithstanding" clause to overcome the Supreme Court's lunatic "Singh Decision" of 1985 which entitled any foreigner who sets a foot on Canadian soil and makes a refugee claim, however bogus, to an oral hearing and appeal and all the rights (welfare, medicare, legal aid, public housing) of Canadian citizens who'd actually contributed to this country. If the political class is serious, it would return power to Canadians by using the "notwithstanding clause." Would be immigrants or "refugees" would have to apply and be vetted abroad. Human smuggling ends! So, are they serious? Paul Fromm Director CANADA FIRST IMMIGRATION REFORM COMMITTEE ** *National Post* May 10, 2011 – 9:00 PM ET | Last Updated: May 10, 2011 10:24 PM ET Federal prosecutors have sharply criticized the RCMP investigation into a freighter that arrived off the west coast in 2009 carrying 76 illegal migrants, saying that interviews were “poorly done,” seized documents were not translated and that the analysis of evidence was “rudimentary.” In a highly unusual memo, Crown prosecutors wrote a strongly worded critique of Project E-Panurgic, the RCMP’s investigation of the human smuggling ship MV Ocean Lady. The memo points to page after page of “problems,” “deficiencies” and “areas which require improvement before a prosecution can proceed.” “Our overall impression is that the RCMP wanted to get through the interviews as quickly as possible with little thought as to what was being achieved in the process,” the memo says, “there was minimal preparation for the interviews, no co-ordination such that when significant facts arose in one interview, these facts could be canvassed in other interviews, and no follow up whatsoever.” The memo explains why, more than a year-and-a-half after the Ocean Lady was seized off Vancouver Island, no criminal charges have yet been laid in connection with the human smuggling operation, which began in Indonesia and Thailand. Although it stands to reason that at least some of those on board would have been involved, all are living freely around Toronto. A copy of the memo was obtained by the National Post. It was sent Dec. 6, 2010 to Robert Prior, Chief Federal Prosecutor for the B.C. region. It was marked “Protected: solicitor/client privilege.” Its authenticity has been verified by the newspaper. The RCMP spent a year on the Ocean Lady investigation before sending its case to prosecutors in Vancouver on Oct. 21, 2010. Police had recommended charges against a dozen of those found on the ship. But instead of approving the charges, Crown lawyers rebuked the Mounties and sent the case back for a significant amount of follow-up. The RCMP was concerned enough about the memo that a senior officer from headquarters in Ottawa flew to Vancouver to deal with the matter and to rebut many of the allegations as unfair and incorrect. The RCMP responded that its officers were under pressure to interview the migrants before they were released from custody by the Immigration and Refugee Board, and said it was not true the investigators went into the interviews with little thought or preparation. The RCMP confirmed it had received the memo from Public Prosecution Service of Canada last December but said it would be inappropriate to comment on the contents because the document was confidential. “As part of the investigative process, the police routinely submit reports to Crown Counsel in a collaborative effort to identify and address any investigational weaknesses or deficiencies,” the RCMP said in a statement. Deputy Commissioner Bob Paulson said Tuesday night that some of the issues raised in the Crown report were inaccurate, and the others had already been dealt with. “All of those concerns in there have been addressed,” he said. “We accepted that advice and criticism from the Crown and went back over our work and refined our work.” In the months since prosecutors first reviewed the case, police have been trying to address the other shortcomings identified in the memo. Officers have been sent to Toronto to conduct follow-up interviews with the migrants. Interviewers were also given packages with maps, photos and scripted questions. The memo highlights some of the challenges involved in investigating international human smuggling organizations like those behind the MV Ocean Lady and the MV Sun Sea, a second ship that arrived off the B.C. coast last August carrying 492 Sri Lankan migrants. It says only two Tamil translators were available to interpret during the interviews. Also, investigators were not allowed to ask Sri Lanka for assistance, since they had been given “very specific direction” from RCMP headquarters in Ottawa not to disclose the migrants’ identities to Colombo. Police also lacked any physical evidence to work with because everything found on the ship was seized by Canada Border Services Agency officers, who were managing the migrants arrival as well as conducting a separate investigation for their refugee hearings. The items were not handed over to the RCMP until months later and by then, police were unable to match the specific exhibits to the migrants they belonged to. Nor were police able to find a trail of the ship’s journey. A GPS device found on board contained no useful data. The RCMP asked Indian authorities for shipping records (the Ocean Lady’s last recorded port of call was in India) but they were unwilling to help, the memo says. Rightly or wrongly, the memo also paints a portrait of a police force struggling with the task at hand. “Most of the RCMP interviewers lacked a basic knowledge of the geography of Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia, and were confused as to the location of major cities, such as Colombo, Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur and Singapore,” the memo says. “At the very least, the interviewers could have brought a map.…” “Important facts” that arose during interviews were not followed up, the memo continues. When interviewees mentioned other migrants, they were not shown photos to verify exactly whom they were talking ab out. Also, while the captain kept a journal in Tamil, it was not translated. Neither was a journal kept by another passenger. Since only two local translators were available, interviews had to be conducted using translators in other cities who interpreted over the telephone. And instead of police asking a question and having the translator repeat it in Tamil, the officers told translators “ask the migrant about this.” As the memo says: “The interviewer should be asking the questions, not the translator.” Another problem concerned a technique police used during interviews. Officers tried to get the migrants to talk by telling them —falsely — that other migrants had identified them as having been in charge of the ship and asking them to respond. But the memo says that “ruse” only alienated the migrants. The memo says interviews conducted by Canada Border Services Agency officers were more effective, partly because the latter had a better grasp of geography and the Sri Lankan conflict. “The RCMP interviews contrast sharply with the CBSA interviews.” Formerly called the Sea Queen, and before that the Princess Easwary, the Ocean Lady was allegedly organized by Shanmugasundaram Kanthaskaran, also known as Peg Leg Shankar, a one-legged former Tamil Tigers rebel wanted on an Interpol warrant for human smuggling. Boarding began at the end of July 2009 in Pangkal Pinang, a port city on Indonesia’s east coast, the memo says. The ship stopped in Thailand at the end of August to pick up the rest of the passengers. As the migrants boarded, an agent took away their passports and phones. In early September, the ship made an unplanned stop near the Philippines because of financial troubles. An agent named Anthony, who had recruited more than a dozen passengers, had absconded with their money. One of the migrants told police the man in charge of the voyage threatened to kill him or his family unless he came up with another $10,000. The memo refers to repeated calls to his family for more money. The ship had only a 15-person lifeboat. Some slept upstairs in the crew quarters but most stayed in the hold and had to ask permission to come on deck, the memo says. During the trip, some migrants sang Tamil Tigers songs and two wore “Tiger jackets.” The ship plotted its course to Canada in low-tech fashion: with a rhumb line and a Marcator projection chart. A Canadian Forces Aurora surveillance plane was patrolling over the Pacific on Oct. 15, 2009, when it spotted the derelict freighter steaming towards Vancouver Island. Two days later, the HMCS Regina intercepted the ship and found 76 Sri Lankans on board. An RCMP tactical team boarded, and the ship was taken to Ogden Point in Victoria. All those on board claimed refugee status and they were released within four months by the Immigration and Refugee Board. Hearings to decide whether they are genuine refugees have not yet been scheduled. The MV Ocean Lady, which is docked in Delta, B.C., has become a symbol of the government’s fight against human smugglers. Cabinet ministers stood on the deck to unveil a new anti-human smuggling bill, and Prime Minister Stephen Harper made a campaign stop there during the election. Immigration Minister Jason Kenney said in an interview last week the government intended to reintroduce the Conservative anti-human smuggling bill once Parliament resumed. He said smuggling syndicates in Southeast Asia had been collecting money for another ship to Canada. “They are still in business,” he said. Project E-Panurgic is one of three investigations into the Ocean Lady. A separate probe is looking into the organizers and agents, while a third is examining links to the Tamil Tigers rebels. E-Panurgic has been trying to piece together which of the 76 people found on the Ocean Lady controlled the ship, and who played what roles during the 2½-month voyage across the Pacific. Police have identified four men who worked in the engine room, and another who worked in the storeroom distributing food. One took roll call each day and three worked in the kitchen. A man who worked in the engine room said he got a lower fare for working on the ship. Dep. Comm. Paulson said the Ocean Lady was a trial run for the human smugglers, and also for government officials. But he said the RCMP had learned from the experience and adapted its procedures accordingly. “CBSA is managing the arrival of these immigrants, the police are there to manage and secure evidence, the health services are there to make sure that all of the immigrants are in good condition and if they need medical attention, so all those priorities compete in the first instance and you are left with a number of difficult decisions that we’ve gotten better at.” Federal prosecutors wrote in the memo that three of the men could be charged. They cannot be named because of a publication ban imposed by the IRB but include the man in charge of the boat, the chief engineer and the captain. All three were in the wheelhouse when the Ocean Lady was intercepted. Several of the migrants have told police the men were running the ship. A witness in the Philippines has also identified one of them, and police have obtained photographs taken by a plane showing two of them in the wheelhouse. In the memo, Crown lawyers in Vancouver proposed charging the men with “organized entry into Canada,” under Section 117 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. If convicted, they could face up to life imprisonment and a $1-million fine.

 

The “perfect storm” is here to rid Canada of censorship legislation

Written by Paul Fromm

Saturday, 28 May 2011 06:39

One Year without Section 13 … and the sky has not fallen! The “perfect storm” is here to rid Canada of censorship legislation http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/may2011_perfect_storm.html Exactly one year ago, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal issued two rulings (Henry Makow and Arthur Topham) which effectively stopped all enforcement of Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. Section 13 is Canada’s pernicious censorship law, which outlaws Internet postings by controversial writers, bloggers and Internet commentators. Victims of Section 13 could be hit with fines up to $10,000 (to $30,000 for hurt feelings) and a lifetime gag order, which, if violated, could result in a prison sentence up to 5 years. The landmark ruling of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal stopped all Section 13 cases pending the final outcome in my case. Based on the fanatical rights enforcers at the Canadian Human Rights Commission – who have so far refused to accept any criticism of their activities – my case could well go on for many more years, until the Supreme Court of Canada can rule. Unfortunately, the CHRC has shown over and over again their willingness to throw as much tax-payers money as they can to keep their censorship franchise running. Rumors have it that the Canadian Human Rights Commission screamed about how bad it would be if the Tribunal stopped enforcement of Section 13 and demanded that the Makow and Topham cases proceed regardless of the Lemire Tribunal decision, which found Section 13 to be unconstitutional. The Human Rights “chicken littles” warned how the sky would fall if they could not harass and censor Canadians for daring to speak out. To its credit, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal did the right thing after senior Tribunal member Hadjis found that Section 13 was unconstitutional. In the rulings issued by Tribunal member Edward Lustig he highlighted the comprehensiveness of the Hadjis ruling. *[4] On September 2, 2009 the Tribunal released its decision in the matter of Warman v. Lemire, 2009 CHRT 26. That case involved a complaint under s. 13 (1) of the CHRA. In his very comprehensive decision, Member Hadjis concluded: "... I have also concluded that s. 13 (1) in conjunction with ss. 54 (1) and (1.1) are inconsistent with s. 2 (b) of the Charter, which guarantees the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression. The restriction imposed by these provisions is not a reasonable limit within the meaning of s. 1 of the Charter." [8] I have reviewed the submissions of the parties and have concluded that it would be appropriate and would properly serve the interests of justice if this matter was adjourned. While the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled in Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Taylor, 1990 3 S.C.R. 892 that s. 13 (1) of the CHRA is constitutional, the application now before the Federal Court seeks to bring clarity to this issue in view of the distinct factual and legal context giving rise to this Tribunal's decision in Warman v. Lemire. Clearly Member Hadjis' decision goes beyond the consideration alone of the penalty provisions in s. 54 of the CHRA, as he chose not to "read out" the penalty provisions and preserve s. 13 of the CHRA. It is now up to the Federal Court to determine the operability of s. 13 of the CHRA. This will achieve the clarity that the Commission has indicated and that I agree is desirable in order to allow the Tribunal to be able to determine this and other cases brought under s. 13 of the CHRA. [9] For these reasons I hereby adjourn these proceedings sine die pending the final outcome in the Warman v. Lemire case.* Paragraph 8 of the Lustig decision was a real dismissal of the CHRC’s “chicken little’” claims in their appeal to the Federal Court of Canada in my case, where they claim that Hadjis should have just dropped the penalty provisions of Section 54 and keep Section 13 as constitutional legislation. As everyone knows who has read the Hadjis decision in my case, it was clear that he was finding that BOTH Section 13 (censorship provision) and Section 54 (fines and lifetime speech bans) were unconstitutional. The Sky is Falling! The Sky is Falling! After a year without the enforcement of Section 13, has the sky fallen as the rights enforcers claimed it would? Has a new Hitler seized control of Parliament? Is the “Nazi Party” on the verge of a “putsch” of Kanada? Are Jews and homosexuals being dragged out on Yonge Street in Toronto and beaten? Have the “Nazis” seized control of the entire Internet? As crazy as this might seem, just have a look at the joint legal submissions of the Canadian Jewish Congress, League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith and the Friends of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in my case. These self-proclaimed “spokesthingys” of the Canadian Jewish community, have claimed that Section 13 is desperately needed for the “physical and psychological security” of “the Canadian Jewish community”. Huh? The “physical” security of the “Canadian Jewish Community”??? So, after a year without the “physical and psychological security” is the Canadian Jewish Community on the verge of being harrassed and dehumanized? Uh no. no. no. no. no. no. and no. Ezra Levant wrote in 2008 that “I didn't know that I [as a Jewish Canadian] was supposed to be a caricature of a thin-skinned Jew, a neurotic Woody Allen stereotype, a perpetual victim. … There is one useful element to their psychobabble dressed up as a legal brief. It is proof, in their own writing, that section 13 is being abused in ways that were never contemplated -- let alone permitted -- by our Supreme Court when they last assessed section 13 in 1990. To protect Jewish "psychological security"? So that's all it takes to trump our fundamental freedom of speech, as enshrined in the Charter of Rights, Bill of Rights, and 800 years of common law?” “Physical Security” Hey we need speech laws! Oh , actual violence? We have nothing to say The Canadian Jewish Congress wants to limit freedom of speech, using the draconian Section 13 of the Canadian Human Right Act to make sure the “Canadian Jewish community” is protected from “hate speech” which will ensure that “as a last resort that harmful speech does not progress into violence.” YET. When anti-Semitic violence is actually done towards Canadian Jews by radical Muslims. The Canadian Jewish Congress is almost silent. Think about this: The Canadian Jewish Congress is spending tens of thousands to oppose freedom of speech and uphold Section 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which has led to the censorship of such “anti-Semitic” publications as the Western Standard, Macleans and *Catholic Insight*. … YET they are not going to spend any time or resources tracking down or exposing the Muslim extremists who attacked a Jew and supporter of Israel with a machete in Ottawa last year. Is it possible the CJC is a bit out of touch with reality? [hmm. Yes!] Oh and not surprisingly… not a single word in the entire Canadian Jewish Congress’s submissions were about radical Muslim haters such as Al-Hayiti, I guess it is not hate (if you’re Muslim that is) to write that gays should be "beheaded", and that Jews "spread corruption". The “Perfect Storm” to blow away Section 13! The Lemire case has finally been scheduled to be heard at the Federal Court of Canada in December, 2011. Unfortunately, the entire weight of removing Section 13 is now completely on my shoulders. Every Section 13 case before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has been stopped pending my case. Other cases at the Federal Court of Canada have also been stopped pending the final disposition in my case. Several “cease and desist” (permanent life-time speech bans) orders issued by the Tribunal have also been put on hold until my case is over. This is certainly a lot of pressure, but I am up for it! It will be a cold day in hell when I will bow down and kiss the feet of these bastard censors. Also it seems doubtful that a political solution will come about either. The Conservative government has been very quiet about Section 13, even tho many individual MPs have spoken out, and even the Conservatives Policy Convention voted overwhelmingly to remove Section 13. Stephen Harper seems to be looking at increasing censorship on the Internet. Thankfully a set of events have come together to make the “perfect storm” against this censorship legislation. Firstly and most importantly, I am the only Canadian in the 35+ year history of the Canadian Human Rights Act to ever win a Sec. 13 case before the Tribunal. This was HUGE. To be able to win in a “kangaroo court” – setup by the censors themselves – is as decisive as any court victory could possibly be. This means the onus is on the CHRC to overturn the ruling, and the wind is at our back. (Talk about a perverse Alice-in-Wonderland system. At the Federal Court, I will be defending the Tribunal, while the CHRC will be slamming them.) Secondly, many Canadians now realize the true threat that the Canadian Human Rights Act poses and under no circumstances can it be properly administered. From mainstream books like “Shakedown” to hundreds of articles denouncing Section 13 in the press, a climate has been fostered which will not only allow Section 13 to fall, but will welcome it with open arms. Dozens of politicians have spoken out against Section 13, the Conservative Party convention voted 98% in favor of removing Section 13 and even bills have were introduced in Parliament to strike down the section [See M-446]. The Act has to be wiped from Canadian laws books. Thirdly, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has stopped all enforcement of Section 13, which, in essence, means the law has no force or effect. By the time my hearing actually gets to court in December 2011, Section 13 will not have been enforced for over a year and a half. To be constitutional under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Section 13 has to pass the proportionality test. This test looks at the “pressing and substantial” nature of the law. As each day passes with Section not being enforced by the Tribunal, how could anyone logically argue that Section 13 censorship is desperately needed in Canada? Each day that passes with Section 13 not being enforced, is one day closer to the law being wiped off the legal books of Canada. Fourthly, the Attorney General of Canada has outright refused to stand by this law at the Federal Court of Canada. The Attorney General of Canada (AG) played a key role in my Tribunal hearing, and his lawyers attended every single day of the hearing. They made many submissions and strenuously argued in favor of keeping Section 13. But after the Tribunal threw out Section 13, the AG accepted the decision and no longer would defend the law. An Access to Information request filed by myself in 2009 showed that upwards of 30 lawyers and others at the Dept. of Justice reviewed every aspect of my case, and specifically chose to accept the Tribunals ruling. This is a huge signal to the Federal Court justices who will eventually hear my case. This is Federal legislation and not even the Federal Attorney General (who is tasked with enforcing all laws in Canada) wants to defend it. Fifthly, several high profile civil liberties organizations have intervened in my case. Both the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and the BC Civil Liberties Association have intervened in my case and submitted very good legal arguments in favor of striking down Section 13. These two organizations join the Canadian Free Speech League and the Canadian Association for Free Expression, who also intervened in my case while it was at the Tribunal level. The inclusion of these civil liberties associations send a clean signal to the Federal Court that my case has far reaching implications and that freedom of speech is being infringed. And lastly, even before I have set a single foot in court, I have won half the case. The Canadian Human Rights Commission has conceded that the penalty provisions of the Canadian Human Rights Act (which allows heavy fines) is unconstitutional. The CHRC was fanatic at the Tribunal to keep Section 54 (fines) but after the Hadjis ruling which found Section 54 was unconstitutional, the CHRC was forced to concede that ... yes indeed it was. This means that of my constitutional challenge against Section 13 and 54, I have won half of it already, since no matter what happens, the penalty provisions of Section 54 will be struck down. It brings a smile to my face when I read these anonymous hate-bloggers who pound away at their keyboards that I have “no chance” in ever winning. While they spread their filth and lies, I sat quietly and worked away in the background and have already won half my case. My Kick-Ass Lawyer – Barbara Kulaszka Above all else, the real “perfect storm” against Section 13 is my courageous lawyer – Barbara Kulaszka. Her in-depth knowledge of this law and never back down style has singlehandedly taken down Section 13. Barbara’s legal submissions were clear, concise and brilliantly written. She is the only lawyer to ever win a Section 13 case in the 35 year history of this law. That really is an amazing accomplishment! And she didn’t win in front of some impartial jury of her peers. No, she won in a place setup by censors, for censors and staffed by censors, who must have an “interest in, and sensitivity to, human rights”. Barbara Kulaszka is one hell of a lawyer and very well respected by her peers. Thanks to her work, Section 13 is on the verge of being thrown out. She is one person that really deserves the Order of Canada, to recognize her significant achievements and remarkable service on behalf of all freedom minded Canadians. -------------------- To keep up to date, please bookmark my website, which will has updates on Section 13 censorship, freedom and my case. The URL is http://www.freedomsite.org Marc Lemire Human Rights Activist May 26, 2011 http://blog.freedomsite.org/2011/05/one-year-without-section-13-and-sky-has.html http://canadianhumanrightscommission.blogspot.com/2011/05/one-year-without-section-13-and-sky-has.html ----------------------------------------- I need your help at the Federal Court Fighting the fanatics at the Canadian "Human Rights" Commission and defending freedom of speech for ALL Canadians is not an easy task. In particular, the Federal Court of Canada challenge to defeat Canada’s internet censorship legislation, has consumed an immense amount of time and resources. This has meant sacrificing a lot of cherished things in my life that I used to take for granted such as spending precious time with my wonderful children. It's also very costly and has incurred heavy debts given that I'm facing a "Human Rights" juggernaut that has a limitless budget. It has already spent millions and is prepared to spend a lot more of your tax dollars to keep their thought control machine running. My courageous lawyer Barbara Kulaszka and I have demonstrated what two dedicated researchers 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 fanatics. Nothing ever comes easy when you are fighting such a racket. 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 if we manage to get this shameful law expunged from our legal books. Every victory we've attained against the "Human Rights" juggernaut has come at great expense. Nothing has come easy. In fact, the “Human Rights” Commission has done everything in their power to stop exposure of their twisted censorship agenda. I cannot carry on this important fight alone. Your donations literally equal the survival of this case. I wish to thank all those that have donated to this worthy cause. How you can help: DONATE NOW to Marc Lemire’s Challenge: Via PayPal Support Marc Lemire's Constitutional Challenge Be part of the Freedom team and contribute what you can to defeat this horrible law and protect Freedom of Speech in Canada ! · Via Mail: Send Cheque or Money Order to: Marc Lemire 152 Carlton Street PO Box 92545 Toronto, Ontario M5A 2K1 Canada It’s time to end the censorship of the extremist Canadian Human Rights Commission! Stop Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act http://www.StopSection13.com <http://www.stopsection13.com/> http://www.freedomsite.org http://blog.freedomsite.org http://canadianhumanrightscommission.blogspot.com

 

Paul Fromm "The Fighting Side of Me": Immigration and Heredity

Written by Paul Fromm

Wednesday, 25 May 2011 03:46

Paul Fromm "The Fighting Side of Me": Immigration and Heredity May 17, 2011 · [image: Herbert Grubel] *Prof. Herbert Grubel* Paul Fromm discusses: - Highlights from a new study by Prof. Herbert Grubel of Canada’s Fraser Institute—Immigration costs Canada $25 billion a year; - Immigrants pay less taxes than Canadians; - The science is in: *Canada’s immigration policy is a pricey failure*; - Last WW I vet dies at age 110: the genetic catastrophe for European man of this fratricdal bloodbath; - Inquest into fire at Jamaican slum dwelling iin Toronto — the hopeless cycle of welfare mamas, drugs, guns and a “culture” where 70% of children are born into single parent families http://reasonradionetwork.com/20110517/the-fighting-side-of-me-immigration-and-heredity