Free Speech in Canada? Don’t Believe It — Open your mouth and you Lose Your Job?

  • Free Speech in Canada? Don’t Believe It — Open your mouth and you Lose Your Job?

    Guest speaker Paul Fromm Returns: Free Speech in Canada?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irw96cOreWY

    • Thursday, July 23, 2015

      7:00 PM to 9:00 PM

    • Price: CAD8.00/per person

      Refund policy

    •  

      Paul Fromm gave us a dynamic and entertaining lecture on May 3rd! Paul will return to tell us how political correctness for the past 30 years has threatened poverty to people who express controversial opinions on their own time, off the job. This topic is very relevant to our Organizer, Brian Ruhe who was just fired on July 3rd from his teaching job at Capilano University because of his free speech in his YouTube videos.

      Paul has a long history going back to the 1960’s in political activism and free speech issues.

      Paul Fromm heads the Canada First Immigration Reform Committee and the Canadian Association for Free Expression, Canada’s leading defender of free speech. He has battled Canada’s Internet censors and supported political prisoners Brad Love, Terry Tremaine, Arthur Topham and David Irving.

      His free speech work has made him the object of arson and death threats from the ARA, who staged a protest outside his Port Credit home in 2006. As part of state pay-back for his free speech work, he has been  routinely hassled by Canada Customs, and had books, including Irish Fairy Tales, seized as possible “hate propaganda.”.  Customs also seized his laptop on suspicion of containing “hate.”

      An author and former English instructor, Mr. Fromm was fired from his position by the Peel Board of Education in 1997, after years of pressure from Jewish lobby groups who hated his support for victims of censorship and his opposition to the Third World invasion of Canada. In 2014, Mr. Fromm ran for mayor of the city of Mississauga, population 720,000, on a campaign of opposition to immigration, the undisputed cause of traffic gridlock, the number one issue for voters in the city.

      Suggested donation $8

      I’m looking forward to hosting Paul again. The YouTube video from hisMay 3 talk to our Meetup group is at:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_HVFbUsYV4

      -Brian Ruhe

Brad Badiuk — Another Teacher Victim of Political Correctness

Brad Badiuk — Another Teacher Victim of Political Correctness

 

In the 1990s, Malcolm Ross and I were both persecuted and lost our jobs after heavy Jewish lobbying pressure for what we had written on our own time off school property.

 

Our treatment made a mockery of the Charter guarantee of freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of the press, etc. Then, Alan Borovoy, the then go-to spokesman for civil liberties in his role as head of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, in a book When Rights Collide, proclaimed that a teacher should have a right to express his views, BUT, having expressed views critical of privileged minorities, no longer has the right to keep his job. Some freedom!

 

Whereas Malcolm Ross and I expounded our views in writing (he in booklets and books, me in newsletters) and public appearances, the latest victim potential victim of censorship, Winnipeg high school electronics teacher Brad Bradiuk is in trouble for expressing his views about Indians on his social media Facebook page.

 

The CBC (December 11, 2014) reported:  “A Winnipeg high school teacher who posted controversial remarks on Facebook about First Nations people is now on paid administrative leave. Some of the comments made by Brad Badiuk, an electronics teacher at Kelvin High School, concern aboriginal people generally. Others targeted Derek Nepinak, the grand chief of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs (AMC).

Kelvin High School electronics teacher Brad Badiuk has been put on paid administrative leave after he made controversial postings about aboriginal people on Facebook 

The controversy started when another teacher posted an article on her Facebook page about John Ralston Saul’s book, The Comeback, which contends that repairing the relationship between First Nations peoples and the rest of Canada is a pressing issue.

In response, Badiuk put these posts (taken verbatim) on Facebook, “OhGoddd how long are aboriginal people going to use what happened as a crutch to suck more money out of Canadians? 

“The benefits the aboriginals enjoy from the white man/europeans far outweigh any wrong doings that were done to a concured people.”

Another line read, “Get to work, tear the treaties and shut the FKup already. My ancestor migrated here early 1900’s they didn’t do anything. Why am I on the hook for their cultural support?”

 

In some of his posts, Badiuk took aim at Nepinak.

“He wears feathers on his head and calls himself the Grand Chief. You see he had an idea. Indians have no money. You have money. So he could get his hands on your money, that would solve the problem of indians without money,” the comments read.

Kevin Hart, who works with the AMC, complained to the school board about the comments, calling them racist and hurtful, and demanding action be taken.

“It just shows that we have so much more to go, that even a teacher that works in a school division, we [even] have to educate those people,” he said. “I think it’s worse, especially when we have educators … leading and teaching the young minds of this country.”

 

Grand Chief of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs Derek Nepinak, who is the subject of some of the controversial postings by Kelvin High School teacher Brad Badiuk, called the comments racist and said they were of particular concern since they were coming from a teacher. (CBC)

​Nepinak was blunt in his response.

“If racists are going to come forward like that and make comments like that, but yet are still tasked with teaching our young people, then we got a responsibility to stand in the way of that.”

 

Mr. Bradiuk was suspended with pay while the Board investigates. “School officials could not say how long the investigation would take or whether Badiuk might face discipline.

“It’s obviously really disheartening,” said Mark Wasyliw, chair of the board of the Winnipeg School Division.

“We are a very diverse school division. We have a huge population of aboriginal students and these types of allegations are always concerning and demoralizing for staff.”

And Paul Olson president of the Manitoba Teachers’ Society wasn’t much help in defending a teacher’s right to hold an opinion and express it on his own time. He said “and although there are no formal rules about what teachers can and cannot say on social media sites such as Facebook, they are nevertheless held to higher standards.

“There’s no such thing as a teacher off duty,” he said. “There’s legal precedent in Canada on that. Teaching is not so much something you do as a teacher, it’s something you are. You’re a teacher 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, anywhere on earth. That can be taken to extremes but if something in your personal or your private conduct causes any concern about your professional practice, that is fair game, at least for a conversation with your employer or your professional organization, depending. So you’re never really off duty.”

Then,  according to a CBC follow-up storyTodd Andres, a Winnipeg privacy lawyer, called for Bradiuk to be punished. “He said there are several cases in Canada where Facebook and Twitter posts made outside the workplace have been grounds for discipline.

Andres said Badiuk’s comments could have a profound impact on the Winnipeg School Division’s reputation, since its mandate is to educate all students equally.

‘If he’s made comments that jeopardize his ability to do things that are in accordance with the mandate, then it’s difficult to see how he can continue to carry on in that role,’ Andres said.

He said the school division must take action against Badiuk to protect its reputation.

‘If they take steps, I think they can mitigate their reputational harm that could come out of this,’ he said. ‘If they don’t, then I think they may be hard-pressed to justify any lack of action.’”

So, dissent from political correctness and the heretic must be punished!

Actually, Mr. Bradiuk’s views strongly echo widely held opinions cited in a recent Maclean’s (January 22, 2015) labelling Winnipeg Canada’s most ‘racist’ city.

“One in three Prairie residents believe that ‘many racial stereotypes are accurate,’ for example, higher than anywhere else in Canada. In Alberta, just 23 per cent do, according to polling by the Canadian Institute for Identities and Migration (CIIM). And 52 per cent of Prairie residents agree that Aboriginals’ economic problems are ‘mainly their fault.’ Nationally, the figure drops to 36 per cent. …

Generally, when groups interact, there is a correlating drop in prejudice as understanding grows, says Jack Jedwab, executive vice-president of the Association for Canadian Studies. But in Manitoba, where 17 per cent of the population is Aboriginal—the highest proportion among provinces, and four times the national average—and where 62 per cent reported “some contact” with indigenous people in the last year, the opposite appears to be true. Just six per cent of people in Manitoba and Saskatchewan consider Aboriginal people “very trustworthy.” In Atlantic Canada, 28 per cent do.

 

Just 61 per cent of Prairie residents said they would be comfortable having an Aboriginal neighbour, compared with 80 per cent in Ontario, according to a recent CBC/Environics poll; and just 50 per cent would be comfortable being in a romantic relationship with an indigenous person, compared to 66 per cent in Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canada.”

 

019

 

 Canadian Association for Free Expression

Box 332,

Rexdale, Ontario, M9W 5L3

Ph: 905-566-4455; FAX: 905-566-4820

Paul Fromm, B.Ed, M.A. Director

 

April 10, 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Malcolm Ross attended the second day of the trial as an observer. Paul Fromm in foreground

 

 

 

 

 

 

Happiness

 

Happiness may seem a strange topic for me to raise in my report to you. However, on January 27, I was standing in the lobby of the Courthouse in St. John, waiting for John Hughes, lawyer for the McCorkill Estate, and CAFÉ’s lawyer Andy Lodge. The hearing  in regards to  efforts by powerful forces to hijack the McCorkill will’s bequest to the National Alliance as “contrary to public policy” was over and the decision in the hands of the judge. We were in the middle of a media scrum. With me was former teacher Malcolm Ross and his brother. I saw the lawyers for the four parties seeking to overturn the will walk by.

 

I wondered whether they were happy. I wondered this because beside me stood a man who deep down is serene and happy. Twenty years ago, Malcolm Ross was removed from the classroom in Moncton because of his political and religious views published in books, booklets and letter-to-the-editor on his own time. A “human rights” (they do not include free speech) tribunal had ruled that Mr. Ross’s very presence, as a conservative, anti-Zionist Christian, created a “poisoned” environment. The person complaining against him was the daughter of a prominent Atlantic Jew. She claimed some students had made anti-Semitic comments to her. Now, she did not attend the school where Malcolm Ross taught. He had not taught her. She had never met him, Nor had he taught the students who allegedly made comments to her. 

 

Neither reason nor common sense mattered.  Mr. Ross had poisoned the environment and he was out. The case, argued by Doug Christie, went all the way to the Supreme Court. The Supremos even back then were hard core Christian haters. Sure, they agreed, Mr. Ross had the right to his religious views, just not the right to express them and hope to keep his job. The same nine Cultural Marxists would, a decade or so later, dream up the obligation of “reasonable accommodation.”  If some Sikh wants to pack his dagger to go to school, despite a zero weapons policy, we must make reasonable accommodations for his peculiarities. But, in this environment of inclusiveness and “reasonable accommodation” there was no room for a Malcolm Ross. All the while, Mr. Ross was reviled in a host of news stories and was even the object of semi-obscene cartoons that mocked his Christian faith.

 

So, Malcolm Ross, with a young family, was out of a job. It would be understandable if he were bitter or angry. But, he picked himself up, did other work and persevered. His deep Christian faith and belief that what he had written was true and right make him a serene and happy man. Not jumping up and down happy as a person who has just scored a big win in a lottery might be, but profoundly secure and happy.

 

I too felt elated that what CAFÉ had done with our very costly intervention and the powerful factum (brief) and presentation of our lawyer Andy Lodge would have a good effect. We had come to preserve a man’s right to pass on his estate to a group whose views might be unpopular or politically incorrect. I wondered how the lawyers on the other side felt. On one level, happy, I suppose because they could pocket fat fees from their well-funded backers. But how could they feel about trying to hijack a will and replace a man’s wishes with the politically correct whims of the moment?

 

The Year Ahead

 

We are already deep into the McCorkill case. This case MUST be won or meddlers and troublemakers may try to hijack a bequest to any group. We have made a strong case and await the judge’s decision.

 

I was asked to testify last September at the Warman v Mark and Connie Fournier libel trial. It went dreadfully wrong. The Fourniers and two other bloggers lost and were hit with a judgement of $143,000, which included hefty costs to pay Richard Warman’s legal bills. They are appealing. Canadian libel law is so loosey goosy that a website owner can be made liable for comments posted by anonymous writers on the site. Another libel case involving the Fourniers is now in progress. Marc Lemire reports: “Defamation law in Canada is a glaring example of the archaic state of our laws. This week in an Ottawa courtroom, two Internet bloggers – who both use pseudonyms – are going to state their case before a judge.  In one corner is the defendant, an inveterate blogger who uses the pseudonym Peter O’Donnell (AKA Roger Smith) who is being sued for saying that another pseudonym “Dr Dawg” (AKA John Baglow) is “one of the Taliban’s more vocal supporters”.  And caught in the middle are Mark and Connie Fournier who ran a message board called FreeDominion, where one alias apparently defamed another alias in a back and forth message thread.” CAFÉ is beginning to lobby for changes to this law.

 

CAFÉ continues to publicize Brad Love’s 11-year ordeal and efforts to continue to gag him. I have had articles published in a number of papers about his plight. Canada continues to back and publicize Terry Tremaine’s 10 year battle against Sec. 13 “human rights” (Internet censorship) and Sec. 319 (“hate law”) charges. The Sec. 319 charges were stayed in 2012, thanks to Doug Christie’s heroic efforts. On May 28/29, the last episode in his case will be his appeal against his sentence in a “contempt of court” charge brought against him, as were all the others, by Richard Warman.

 

And, of course, there is Arthur Topham. As of March 13, he faces a full blown trial on “hate charges” for comments, some of them satirical, on his website Radicalpress.com. He is also threatened with horrific bail conditions, including having to shut down his Radicalpress.com website and to post NOTHING on the Internet. CAFÉ will be helping and advising him at the hearing date, April 9 in Quesnel, British Columbia. The date for the trial has not yet been set.

 

One of our biggest challenges is to alert more people to the free speech cause – to turn them on to freedom and to make them aware of the very real threats to free speech and free thought in Canada. We have already held meetings in five provinces – New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, Alberta and B.C. this year. Our publicly advertised meeting in St. John attracted a number of new people to the cause.

 

We are proud of the CAFÉ website that we were able to construct because of your generosity – http://cafe.nfshost.com.

 

 

Your Support Pledge

 

And the well deserved praise “generosity”  brings  me to my request that you continue to support CAFÉ. None, and I mean none, of this activity is possible without the resources, without your financial support. We had initially budgeted $10,000 for the McCorkill will intervention. The costs have ballooned and now top $30,000. Many years ago, when I was much younger, a pompous old man wagged a finger at me and pronounced: “If it’s about freedom, it should be free.” What a fool!

 

Those seeking to crush free speech spend large sums of their money and the public money to pursue their goal. Similarly, defending freedom has serious costs – people’s energy, people’s time, people’s courage and, yes, the funding to make the activities possible.

 

I know, as in the past, I can count on your support and generosity. Please use the enclosed coupon and post paid envelope.

 

For freedom,

 

 

Paul Fromm

Director

 

 

 

 

 

CAFE, Box 332, Rexdale, Ontario, M9W 5L3

 

__   Here’s my donation of ____to help CAFÉ’s Spring programme.

__   Here’s my special donation of _____  to help  CAFE pay off its legal bills in the McCorkill will case.

__  Please renew my subscription for 2014 to the Free Speech Monitor ($15).

Please charge ______myVISA/Mastercard#________________________________________________________________

 

Expiry date: __________ Signature:________________________________________________________________________________

 

Name:____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Address:__________________________________________________________________________________           

 

_______________________________________________________Email______________________________

Judge reserves decision in unusual estate case

TELEGRAPH JOURNAL PIC OF PAUL AND MALCOLMJudge reserves decision in unusual estate case

JENNIFER PRITCHETT Telegraph-Journal
January 28, 2014

 

Malcolm Ross attended the second day of the trial as an observer. Paul Fromm in foreground

Photo: Jennifer Pritchett/Telegraph-Journal

SAINT JOHN – A Court of Queen’s Bench judge has reserved his decision on whether a Saint John man’s will is legal and can bequeath about $250,000 in rare coins and antiquities to an American neo-Nazi group.

Harry Robert McCorkill left his estate to the National Alliance when he died in 2004. A decade later, his sister, some rights groups and the province of New Brunswick went to court to prevent the money from flowing to the white supremacist, anti-Semitic organization.

The trial into the matter, held Monday and Tuesday, saw lawyers from both sides make arguments in an unusual legal case that weighs peoples’ individual right to leave their estate to whomever – and whatever type of organization – they choose against the court’s ability to intervene in special circumstances that are deemed against “public policy.”

There’s little case law on the subject and in many ways, the debate around the McCorkill estate is unique and breaks new legal ground.

Dan Delaquis, a lawyer for the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, told the court Tuesday that the gift, if it’s permitted to stand, will be “detrimental to the Jewish community” and will result in an erosion of Canadian values because the National Alliance has a mandate of hate and is a well-known white supremacist group.

“We submit in this case that the public interest must outweigh the wish of Mr. McCorkill,” he said.

Marc-Antoine Chiasson, a lawyer for Isabelle Rose McCorkill, argued that one need only look at the National Alliance’s own handbook to see firsthand how it purports a racist message.

He read excerpts of the small handbook in court on Monday, highlighting how it points to “white” living spaces with white schools and residential areas with the overall view to create a white world.

Chiasson also pointed to the words of National Alliance founder William Luther Pierce and described his books, Hunter and The Turner Diaries, which were written under the pseudonym “Andrew Macdonald,” as repugnant.

But Andy Lodge, a lawyer for the Canadian Association for Free Expression (CAFE), told the court Tuesday that the fact that an organization may be considered “morally reprehensible” should have no impact on whether it can be a beneficiary of an estate. He pointed out that there are no laws prohibiting even a serial killer or a drug dealer to receive assets from a will.

For the court to evaluate whether a beneficiary such as the National Alliance is against “public policy,” he argued, would open “Pandora’s box.”

He said it would do more harm than good if the courts started assessing a beneficiary’s past or try to predict how they would spend the money they receive from a will.

Lodge described the court debate over McCorkill’s will as an “exercise in futility.” He argued there is no legal basis to challenge the will because it’s valid, follows New Brunswick’s Wills Act and contains no words that are contrary to Canada’s public policy.

The lawyer said he knows of no law that would prohibit a living person in Canada from giving money to the National Alliance.

John Hughes, the lawyer for the executor of the estate Fred Streed, argued that the application to prevent the disposition of McCorkill’s estate to the National Alliance should be dismissed.

Isabelle McCorkill didn’t attend the trial in Saint John nor did any representative from the National Alliance, a West-Virginia based organization.

Chiasson, her lawyer, has said that the legal battle over her brother’s estate has never been about the money, but rather, about preventing it from going to a neo-Nazi group.

Catherine Fawcett, who represents the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith Canada, also argued that the gift to the National Alliance is “completely against public policy” and pointed to the connection between hate propaganda and violence.

McCorkill’s estate includes, among other items, a collection of hundreds of Greek, Roman, and Italian coins – some dating back to 525 BC – that he amassed since the 1970s. Some items were once displayed at the University of Saskatchewan’s Antiquities Museum and a release from that institution in 1997 described him as a well-travelled collector and a chemist who spent time at MIT and the Smithsonian Institution.

Little else is known about the man or why he lived in Saint John, where he moved about a year before his death. He lived quietly in a townhouse in Millidgeville and after he died at home in 2004, his body remained at the Saint John Regional Hospital for nearly two weeks while the authorities tried to track down his next of kin.

The National Alliance paid for his funeral and hired Malcolm Ross and William Ross of Moncton to transport, store and take inventory of his assets.

Malcolm Ross, who attended McCorkill’s court hearing in Saint John on Tuesday with his brother, was the focus of a 1996 Supreme Court ruling that found that the former Moncton-area teacher whose off-duty writings claimed Christians were under attack by an international Jewish conspiracy, had in fact “poisoned” the educational environment. The ruling upheld a human rights board of inquiry that ordered Ross into a non-teaching job.

Outside court, he told the Telegraph-Journal that he was there to “observe,” but declined to comment on his connection to the McCorkill matter.

“Fighting for Democracy” NB Attorney General Seeks to Hijack Scholar’s Will

“Fighting for Democracy” NB Attorney General Seeks to Hijack Scholar’s Will

MONCTON. July 29, 2013. Christian free thinker and himself a victim of Zionist repression, Malcolm Ross reports from Moncton that the New Brunswick Attorney general has entered the fray to try to hijack the will of Robert McCorkill who left a large bequest of ancient coins to the National Alliance, a U.S. White nationalist group. The AG’s office, Mr. Ross told CAFE today, is claiming that it is joining the effort to  nullify the bequest because it “is joining the fight for democracy.” That, says the Moncton author, is “like saying we will invade Afghanistan to bring them peace and democracy.”
“The efforts to overturn Mr. McCorkill’s bequest pose a serious threat to freedom and personal property,” says Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression (CAFE).”Is there now to be a ‘politically correct’ litmus test applied to bequests?” he asked. 

 

Last Tuesday (July 23) the National Post reported on the latest temporary, we hope, victory by a band of mischief makers and meddlers to hijack a bequest by late scholar Robert McCorkill to the National Alliance, a White Nationlist group in the U.S. The Post reported:”

Robert McCorkill lived in Saskatoon and Ottawa before moving to Saint John, where he died in 2004.Robert McCorkill lived in Saskatoon and Ottawa before moving to Saint John, where he died in 2004.

The sister of a New Brunswick man who left a collection of coins and artifacts worth an estimated $250,000 to a neo-Nazi group in the United States has obtained an injunction.

The court order temporarily blocks any distribution of Robert McCorkill’s estate or transfer out of New Brunswick, Ottawa-based lawyer Richard Warman stated in an email.

McCorkill, who also went by McCorkell, left his collection to the U.S.-based National Alliance when he died in Saint John nine years ago, but the estate has remained unsettled.

The ex parte injunction was obtained on Monday on behalf of McCorkill’s sister Isabelle McCorkill, who will be challenging the bequest on public policy grounds, Warman said.

‘I anticipate that other groups will intervene in support of the application in the coming days,’ he said.

Anti-racism groups had planned to try to stop the National Alliance from receiving the items, fearing they could be sold and help spark a rebirth of the neo-Nazi group that has been in decline since its founder died more than a decade ago. … ‘All assets of the Estate of Harry Robert McCorkill (a.k.a. McCorkell) shall remain in the province of New Brunswick until further order of this court,’ he said.”

A far leftist blogger going by the handle BigCityLib confirmed the role of the busybody Richard Warman. “I’ve written about Robert McCorkell (or McCorkill) a few times.  He was a  Canadian chemist with White Nationalist leanings, and when he died he bequeathed  $1,000,000 in ancient gold coins and other valuables to the National Alliance, an American hate/terror group.  The collection itself is quite impressive: ancient Libyan, Roman, and Turkish artifacts.  It would be a pity if it wound up helping to refinance American Neo-Nazis.
Behind the scenes, a number of people (including BCLSB fave Richard Warman) have been working to stop this from happening.  And it looks like they’ve succeeded, at least temporarily. Yesterday afternoon an injunction was obtained blocking any distribution of Robert McCorkill’s estate ‘until further order’ from the
New Brunswick Court of Queen’s Bench.  …  It would be nice to see an academic institution of one sort or another adopt the collection.”
Warman supposedly actually has a full-time job doing something or other at the Department of National Defence. He’s currently preparing for a mega libel trial where he’s suing neo-con bloggers Mark and Connie Fournier of freedominion.com. He’s also recently slapped Arthur Topham another of his victims  (a Sec. 319 “hate law” complaint)  with a threat of libel. Anyway, the mystery remains how he can manage so much all consuming litigation and still discharge his duties at  National Defence. Free Dominion asserts that Warman has filed libel suits or threatened such suits against at least 60 parties in the past dozen years!

In a later report, the National Post  (July 26, 2013) expanded on the role of the newly found litigant, Mr. McCorkill’s long stranged sister Isabel, who apparently only now — 9 years later — has learned about his will and has developed an outrage at the money being left to a U.S. nationalist group: “Robert McCorkill left his collection to the National Alliance when he died in Saint John nine years ago, but the estate remains in dispute.

Isabelle McCorkill, his estranged sister, is now arguing the will should be null and void. ‘We’re not taking any issue with how it’s drafted or anything like that. We’re taking issue with the specific gift to the National Alliance,’ said Marc-Antoine Chiasson, her Moncton-based lawyer.

He contends giving nearly $250,000 to a white supremacist group violates Canadian policy and is against the law. ‘In our view, the gift would basically be financing a hate group, which flies in the face of what we stand for in Canada,’ said Chiasson.

‘Hate speech in Canada is criminally prohibited. Secondly, Canada has signed on to numerous international conventions with the specific goal and aim to get rid of hate speech, hate groups and the financing of hate groups.’

Chiasson says his client, who didn’t have any contact with her brother since 1991, is not interested in the money. But when she learned it had been willed to the National Alliance, she felt compelled to act, he said.”

 

Mr. Ross points out that the long lost sister Isabelle has turned up and, although apparently impoverished, has been able to retain one of Moncton’s top laws firms — most convenient for the meddlers who’d like to nullify the bequest to the National Alliance.

 

Mr. Ross calls the current proceedings “a money grab. They are trying to bleed the estate through litigation.” Sadly, because of the freeze placed by the court last week on the estate’s assets, the current storage costs for the coins and artifacts left by Mr. McCorkill have actually had to be paid out of the executor’s own pocket.”

 

Isabelle McCorkell did not even attend her brother’s funeral. “The National Alliance paid for his funeral,” Mr. Ross, who lost his teaching position because of his anti-Zionist writings in the 1990s, explained.

 

In the past week, John Hughes, lawyer for the National Alliance, has been assembling affidavits from National Alliance Chairman Erich Gliebe, Malcolm Ross and others who have knowledge of the estate.

 

A further hearing will be held on Wednesday. Mr. Hughes will be arguing that the wishes of the testator should not be violated. He is also seeking to examine the newly emerged Isabel McCorkell. Her lawyer argued against it but the presiding judge is apparently going to allow it.

 

The attempt to nullify the McCorkill bequest is a serious threat to freedom in Canada. That the state should be able to alter a will for political reasons is scandalous. Much rides on the legal efforts of National Alliance attorney John Hughes, defending the right of a person to will his estate to the persons or causes he chooses.

 

 

 

Tax Rebel Jack Klundert Speaks at Doug Christie Memorial in London

Tax Rebel Jack Klundert Speaks at Doug Christie Memorial in London
LONDON, March 24, 2013. At the second of four memorials for  free speech lawyer Doug Christie, tax rebel Jack Klundert of Windsor, Ontario paid tribute to his long-time lawyer and friend. The memorials are being organized by the Canadian Association for free Expression: Toronto, March 23; London, March 24; Edmonton, March 25; and Vancouver, March 26.
“In 1992,” Mr. Klundert recounted, “I heard from Murray Gauvreau that the Income Tax Act was illegal. I was advised to get a copy of Canada’s Constitution. Believe it or not, the Queen’s Printer didn’t have one. I finally got a copy from Ron Gostick.”
“In 1994, I decided to challenge the Income Tax Act. In 1997, I went to court and won,” he said. “In fact, we’ve been to court four times and won three times, However, the Federal Court always overturned our lower court victories. It has been over 17 years of battle” and Doug Christie was his lawyer throughout.Photo
“And the presence of that fine man was the only reason,” he added, “why I had any success at all in fighting the oppression of our freedoms under the repressive Income Tax system. I was seeking freedom in a different way,” the Windsor optometrist explained.
“Doug Christie had a great heart for freedom and for justice,” Mr. Klundert explained. “He is the man God sent me.  Every case we vowed to fight for freedom and for justice and to do God’s will. It is difficult to stand day after day getting flack because you don’t believe in political correctness.”
Doug “bought his cowboy hat to celebrate after winning a case in the expectation of being paid. He wasn’t but he continued to wear it as a celebration of freedom and the unpredictable nature of  the life of a lawyer.”

Photo

Also speaking at the meeting was another Doug Christie client, Malcolm Ross from Moncton, New Brunswick. He lost his teaching position after the Supreme Court upheld a New Brunswick Human Rights Commission finding that his writings and very presence in the classroom created “a poisoned environment” even though he never taught the girl who had complained and she had not even attended the school where he taught.
Meeting chairman Paul Fromm noted that Doug Christie sometimes felt despondent about the threats to free speech in Canada and felt that he had accomplished little. Mr. Fromm reminded Mr. Christie on occasion and has told many audiences across Canada that Doug Christie is a legal giant. He had been to the Supreme Court at least nine times. “He appeared before the Supreme Court so often they had to give him his own dressing room,” Mr. Fromm quipped. “Most lawyers never go to a court of appeal let alone the Supreme Court.”
“Doug Christie got rid of Canada’s arcane ‘false news’ law in the Zundel case, when the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional in 1992,” Mr. Fromm noted. “Also,” he added, “Doug Christie gutted the ‘war crimes law’ in the Finta case which went all the way to the Supreme Court. Canada would no longer be able to try people who had not been Canadian citizens for action committed in a foreign country against people who were not Canadians,” he added. “At least this aspect of German-bashing and Slav-bashing, brought in by Brian Mulroney at the behest of the Jewish lobby was overturned.”
“And, while Doug Christie did not live to see the demise of Canada’s notorious “hate law” — Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code — he did develop arguments about Internet communication advanced in the Terry Tremaine case, that may, in future cases. limit this law’s use to hobble free expression on the Internet,” Mr. Fromm concluded.