Number 197 May, 2012

Number 197                                                   May, 2012

                                                                                         

Crown Clashes With Brad Love Over Parole Ban on Writing to Anyone

 NEWMARKET, March 13, 2012. It was almost as if she were baiting or mocking him, as the Crown Attorney repeatedly asked former political prisoner Brad Love: “Free speech is what this is all about. You think the courts were trying to criminalize your dissent?”

Yes,” the 53-year old old worker and inveterate letter-writer agreed.

Today, Mr. Love finished his evidence in a protracted three-year “breach of probation” trial that has seen him return to Toronto ten times for court appearances and his much interrupted trial before Judge Kelly Wright.

At issue was a brutal 2006 parole condition, item “r”, in a list of conditions which Mr. Love had to obey. He was forbidden to write to anyone unless they had granted permission to receive his material. In terms of writing, he was rendered gagged non-person.

The Crown explained what Judge Hogg was seeking to accomplish in 2006: “The goal was to craft a condition where you would not send these editorial comments unless requested.” Mr. Love would frequently send newspaper articles with comments written on them in magic marker.

Mr. Love was arrested by eight detectives at an Alternative Forum meeting, March 9, 2009 in Toronto, just after he’d finished a talk, ironically, on free speech. He had sent packages of news articles with his comments to the Canadian Jewish Congress, B’nai Brith, the Jewish Students Union and the York University Students Union in regards to the anti-Israeli apartheid week.

In each case, he testified, he called and got permission to send them his views. He’d say: “I saw the article about you guys and I love your radical views. I’d like to send you some of mine. They’d say, ‘sure.'”

“I’d phone them in regard to whatever news story prompted my interest. My interest piqued their interest,” he recalled. “I’d say, ‘Would it be okay, if I sent you some of my stuff?” and they’d say ‘sure.'”

Judge Hogg restricted “what I could say,” Mr. Love testified. “However, I believe I followed his guidelines

Judge Hogg, now retired, had a reputation for being a judicial radical. His order was “overbroad,” said Mr. Love’s lawyer, Peter Leckie.

Mr. Leckie, on re-direct, asked Mr. Love: “Do you feel you did anything wrong in terms of Judge Hogg’s conditions.”

Mr. Love responded that the groups who complained, only a small number of those who’ve received his commentaries, “are either over sensitive on this issue or have an ulterior motive.These groups publicize their beliefs,” he added, “but if they get some material with views they don’t agree with, they call the police. I like to question everything that appears before me in my country.”

In a testy exchange with Mr.  Love, the Crown said: “It’s about your right to exercize freedom of speech. It’s a huge part of what drives you as a person.”

“That what my grandparents fought for in two wars,” Mr. Love shot back. “No one should limit my freedom of expression. I’m 53 years old and I’ve seen more than most people,” Mr. Love added. “I take freedom of expression to the outer limits,” he explained.

Earlier, the Crown had acknowledged that Mr. Love, who reads five books a week and is terminally curious, was very intelligent and self-educated.

The trial, which could send former political prisoner and letter-writer Love back to prison, will hear the judge’s verdict on May 28. — Paul Fromm

Thugs & Lousy Policing, 1: Free Speech, 0

LONDON, Ontario. March 24, 2012. For the second time in a week, London police lost control of a riotous situation and failed to protect citizens’ rights.

Last Saturday, riotous drunks and rowdies burned a car, lit fires, damaged many police cruisers and smashed property near Fanshawe College and were not subdued until dawn. Today a mob of anti-fascists, Occupy London goons, some armed with lead pipes and hatchets, and others with orange Mohawk haircuts, faces covered with bandannas, tried to attack 30 people assembling in a downtown underground parking lot for a White Pride Parade. One car window was smashed and another car kicked. A woman was menaced by a goon with a hatchet.

White Pride supporter’s car damaged by anti-racist goons

Several fights with armed anti-fascist thugs ended with four of them incapacitated.

However, the European Pride parade was halted by the police. Those assembled were ordered back to their cars and told “Leave this part of London now. Do you understand?”

“The policing was an outrage. They were either utterly incompetent and unprepared or totally unwilling to protect the rights of free assembly,” fumed Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, who had driven from Toronto to cover the event for the American Free Press.

“I asked the cop who ordered me to leave that part of town for his name,” Mr. Fromm said. “He just arrogantly pointed to the ‘police’ letters on his jacket. That’s not identification.”

“Those of us celebrating European Pride had the right to assemble peacefully and to hold our rally,” Mr. Fromm added. “The police failed to control the antifa goons and, say, force them to the other side of the street so that we could march peacefully. Thuggery and incompetent or lazy policing cancelled our right to freedom of expression.”

Worse, still, Mr. Fromm added,” rally organizer Max Heinz had been contacted by the police and had assured them “the European Pride folks would not being carrying weapons. We weren’t but many of the masked street thugs were.” At least one antifa was arrested but it’s unknown whether he was charged.

Warman & Canadian Human Rights Commission Still Itching to Send Terry Tremaine to Prison

REGINA. March 13, 2012. Speaking to a meeting of free speech stalwarts in Regina tonight Douglas Christie reported on a recent case management conference call regarding former political prisoner Terry Tremaine. Maitre Poulin, lawyer for the Canadian Human Rights Commission, and complainant Richard Warman are pressing for an early sentencing hearing in the hopes of sending the Internet dissident to jail.

On two complaints from chronic complainer Richard Warman, Mr. Tremaine faced a contempt of court hearing in Victoria in November, 2010. On November 29, trial judge Sean Harrington acquitted Mr.Tremaine of contempt of court as he had not been served with the court order until the summer of 2009. The federal court order was to enforce the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal decision of February, 2007 ordering Mr. Tremaine to “cease and desist” from posting on the Internet the same or similar passages that were found by the tribunal as being likely to “expose to hatred or contempt” privileged groups in Canada. Later in 2007, Mr. Tremaine made some further postings that he felt complied with the vague cease and desist order. These became the subject of the contempt of court charge. By the summer of 2009, Daniel Poulin had expanded his interpretation of “cease and desist ” to mean the taking down of Mr., Tremaine’s website http://nspcanada.nfshost.com , which contains much mainline material. This would involve the complete political gagging on Mr. Tremaine.

On October 26, 2011, in a decision that contained a strong dissenting opinion, a three-person panel of the Federal Court of Appeal overturned Mr. Tremaine’s acquittal and entered a guilty verdict. In his dissenting opinion, Judge Denis Pelletier found the CHRT order vague. On November 23, 2011 Douglas Christie filed leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

In the recent conference call from Montreal, Federal Court Judge Harrington demanded whether Mr. Poulin and Warman seriously wanted a man jailed “for something, the Supreme Court might decide he is not guilty of,” Mr. Christie reported.

Judge Harrington suggested waiting until the Supreme Court decides whether or not to grant leave. He twice repeated his question to Mr. Warman and, Mr. Christie reported, “never received a direct answer,” just more preaching about the necessity to swiftly punish people for contempt of court. In the end, Warman and Poulin were given until April 10 to put their submissions in writing. Mr. Christie will have until May 10 to craft an answer. The Supreme Court usually responds to requests for leave to appeal within six months.

As well, Bill C-304 which would repeal Sec. 13 – the Internet section of the Canadian Human Rights Act under which Mr. Tremaine was found guilty — has received second reading and may well be law by the summer. “We will fight this every step of the way,” the Battling Barrister vowed at the end of his remarks.

Commons Justice Committee hearings on Bill C-304 are scheduled for April 24 and 26, Committee Clerk Jean-Francois Page told CAFÉ, April 3.

Prison Authorities Deny Prisoners “White Supremacist” Literature

We have reported on the checkered story of Michelle Erstikaitis. She has been designated a “dangerous offender” – potential life in prison – for essentially a series of minor offences. Her White Nationalist opinions, we believe, have targeted her and aggravated her situation. On November 26, 2011, she was flung into involuntary segregation, in part, because of her possession of political literature. She filed a grievance. J. McKinnon of the Grand Valley Institution for Woman answered her grievance in a December 11, 2011 response.

This person wrote: “Patrol staff attempted to enter your room … to complete a non-routine reasonable grounds search … based on information received that you had KKK or White Supremacy materials and paraphernalia in your room. … Documents containing KKK and White Supremacy materials, pictures and propaganda and other concerns documentation [sic] which is [sic] security intelligence worthy were seized form your room. … In speaking with Security Intelligence Officer (SIO) on December 06 2011, it was determined that many of the photographs that were located in your cell depicted Nazi Germany, the Nuremberg Trials, Swastikas and Hitler. There was also a Star of David written in blood located on the floor of your closet. However, the SIO did affirm there was no evidence of ‘KKK material’ found in your cell as stated in the segregation report and she is unsure why this was stated. … Given that you are in an institution with many different ethnical [sic] groups, this material is identified as offensive and could have potential for jeopardizing the security of the institution.”

A Security Intelligence Officer – what is that when it’s home? It sounds like a political correctness commissar. Now adults can be disciplined for possessing and can be denied “offensive” material that might upset others. One wonders whether a poster of say, Che Guevara or Malcolm X would have been deemed “offensive”, even though they are repugnant to many Whites or anti-communists. What about a pro-abortionist displaying a picture of her hideous hero Dr. Henry Morgenthaler? All rights fly out the window when people are silenced because what they say or have might be deemed “offensive” by someone. So pictures of Nazi Germany are deemed to be “security intelligence worthy.”

It seems the prison had to admit its “information” that Miss Erstikaitis possessed Klan material was wrong, but she got punished anyway.

NEWMARKET, March 13, 2012. It was almost as if she were baiting or mocking him, as the Crown Attorney repeatedly asked former political prisoner Brad Love: “Free speech is what this is all about. You think the courts were trying to criminalize your dissent?”

Yes,” the 53-year old old worker and inveterate letter-writer agreed.

Today, Mr. Love finished his evidence in a protracted three-year “breach of probation” trial that has seen him return to Toronto ten times for court appearances and his much interrupted trial before Judge Kelly Wright.

At issue was a brutal 2006 parole condition, item “r”, in a list of conditions which Mr. Love had to obey. He was forbidden to write to anyone unless they had granted permission to receive his material. In terms of writing, he was rendered gagged non-person.

The Crown explained what Judge Hogg was seeking to accomplish in 2006: “The goal was to craft a condition where you would not send these editorial comments unless requested.” Mr. Love would frequently send newspaper articles with comments written on them in magic marker.

Mr. Love was arrested by eight detectives at an Alternative Forum meeting, March 9, 2009 in Toronto, just after he’d finished a talk, ironically, on free speech. He had sent packages of news articles with his comments to the Canadian Jewish Congress, B’nai Brith, the Jewish Students Union and the York University Students Union in regards to the anti-Israeli apartheid week.

In each case, he testified, he called and got permission to send them his views. He’d say: “I saw the article about you guys and I love your radical views. I’d like to send you some of mine. They’d say, ‘sure.'”

“I’d phone them in regard to whatever news story prompted my interest. My interest piqued their interest,” he recalled. “I’d say, ‘Would it be okay, if I sent you some of my stuff?” and they’d say ‘sure.'”

Judge Hogg restricted “what I could say,” Mr. Love testified. “However, I believe I followed his guidelines

Judge Hogg, now retired, had a reputation for being a judicial radical. His order was “overbroad,” said Mr. Love’s lawyer, Peter Leckie.

Mr. Leckie, on re-direct, asked Mr. Love: “Do you feel you did anything wrong in terms of Judge Hogg’s conditions.”

Mr. Love responded that the groups who complained, only a small number of those who’ve received his commentaries, “are either over sensitive on this issue or have an ulterior motive.These groups publicize their beliefs,” he added, “but if they get some material with views they don’t agree with, they call the police. I like to question everything that appears before me in my country.”

In a testy exchange with Mr. Love, the Crown said: “It’s about your right to exercize freedom of speech. It’s a huge part of what drives you as a person.”
“That what my grandparents fought for in two wars,” Mr. Love shot back. “No one should limit my freedom of expression. I’m 53 years old and I’ve seen more than most people,” Mr. Love added. “I take freedom of expression to the outer limits,” he explained.

Earlier, the Crown had acknowledged that Mr. Love, who reads five books a week and is terminally curious, was very intelligent and self-educated.

The trial, which could send former political prisoner and letter-writer Love back to prison, will hear the judge’s verdict on May 28. — Paul Fromm

Thugs & Lousy Policing, 1: Free Speech, 0

LONDON, Ontario. March 24, 2012. For the second time in a week, London police lost control of a riotous situation and failed to protect citizens’ rights.

Anti-free speech goons smash window of White Pride marchers

Last Saturday, riotous drunks and rowdies burned a car, lit fires, damaged many police cruisers and smashed property near Fanshawe College and were not subdued until dawn. Today a mob of anti-fascists, Occupy London goons, some armed with lead pipes and hatchets, and others with orange Mohawk haircuts, faces covered with bandannas, tried to attack 30 people assembling in a downtown underground parking lot for a White Pride Parade. One car window was smashed and another car kicked. A woman was menaced by a goon with a hatchet.

White Pride supporter’s car damaged by anti-racist goons

Several fights with armed anti-fascist thugs ended with four of them incapacitated.

However, the European Pride parade was halted by the police. Those assembled were ordered back to their cars and told “Leave this part of London now. Do you understand?”

“The policing was an outrage. They were either utterly incompetent and unprepared or totally unwilling to protect the rights of free assembly,” fumed Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, who had driven from Toronto to cover the event for the American Free Press.

“I asked the cop who ordered me to leave that part of town for his name,” Mr. Fromm said. “He just arrogantly pointed to the ‘police’ letters on his jacket. That’s not identification.”

“Those of us celebrating European Pride had the right to assemble peacefully and to hold our rally,” Mr. Fromm added. “The police failed to control the antifa goons and, say, force them to the other side of the street so that we could march peacefully. Thuggery and incompetent or lazy policing cancelled our right to freedom of expression.”

Worse, still, Mr. Fromm added,” rally organizer Max Heinz had been contacted by the police and had assured them “the European Pride folks would not being carrying weapons. We weren’t but many of the masked street thugs were.” At least one antifa was arrested but it’s unknown whether he was charged.

Warman & Canadian Human Rights Commission Still Itching to Send Terry Tremaine to Prison
REGINA. March 13, 2012. Speaking to a meeting of free speech stalwarts in Regina tonight Douglas Christie reported on a recent case management conference call regarding former political prisoner Terry Tremaine. Maitre Poulin, lawyer for the Canadian Human Rights Commission, and complainant Richard Warman are pressing for an early sentencing hearing in the hopes of sending the Internet dissident to jail.

On two complaints from chronic complainer Richard Warman, Mr. Tremaine faced a contempt of court hearing in Victoria in November, 2010. On November 29, trial judge Sean Harrington acquitted Mr.Tremaine of contempt of court as he had not been served with the court order until the summer of 2009. The federal court order was to enforce the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal decision of February, 2007 ordering Mr. Tremaine to “cease and desist” from posting on the Internet the same or similar passages that were found by the tribunal as being likely to “expose to hatred or contempt” privileged groups in Canada. Later in 2007, Mr. Tremaine made some further postings that he felt complied with the vague cease and desist order. These became the subject of the contempt of court charge. By the summer of 2009, Daniel Poulin had expanded his interpretation of “cease and desist ” to mean the taking down of Mr., Tremaine’s website http://nspcanada.nfshost.com , which contains much mainline material. This would involve the complete political gagging on Mr. Tremaine.

On October 26, 2011, in a decision that contained a strong dissenting opinion, a three-person panel of the Federal Court of Appeal overturned Mr. Tremaine’s acquittal and entered a guilty verdict. In his dissenting opinion, Judge Denis Pelletier found the CHRT order vague. On November 23, 2011 Douglas Christie filed leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.

In the recent conference call from Montreal, Federal Court Judge Harrington demanded whether Mr. Poulin and Warman seriously wanted a man jailed “for something, the Supreme Court might decide he is not guilty of,” Mr. Christie reported.

Judge Harrington suggested waiting until the Supreme Court decides whether or not to grant leave. He twice repeated his question to Mr. Warman and, Mr. Christie reported, “never received a direct answer,” just more preaching about the necessity to swiftly punish people for contempt of court. In the end, Warman and Poulin were given until April 10 to put their submissions in writing. Mr. Christie will have until May 10 to craft an answer. The Supreme Court usually responds to requests for leave to appeal within six months.

As well, Bill C-304 which would repeal Sec. 13 – the Internet section of the Canadian Human Rights Act under which Mr. Tremaine was found guilty — has received second reading and may well be law by the summer. “We will fight this every step of the way,” the Battling Barrister vowed at the end of his remarks.

Commons Justice Committee hearings on Bill C-304 are scheduled for April 24 and 26, Committee Clerk Jean-Francois Page told CAFÉ, April 3.

Prison Authorities Deny Prisoners “White Supremacist” Literature
We have reported on the checkered story of Michelle Erstikaitis. She has been designated a “dangerous offender” – potential life in prison – for essentially a series of minor offences. Her White Nationalist opinions, we believe, have targeted her and aggravated her situation. On November 26, 2011, she was flung into involuntary segregation, in part, because of her possession of political literature. She filed a grievance. J. McKinnon of the Grand Valley Institution for Woman answered her grievance in a December 11, 2011 response.
This person wrote: “Patrol staff attempted to enter your room … to complete a non-routine reasonable grounds search … based on information received that you had KKK or White Supremacy materials and paraphernalia in your room. … Documents containing KKK and White Supremacy materials, pictures and propaganda and other concerns documentation [sic] which is [sic] security intelligence worthy were seized form your room. … In speaking with Security Intelligence Officer (SIO) on December 06 2011, it was determined that many of the photographs that were located in your cell depicted Nazi Germany, the Nuremberg Trials, Swastikas and Hitler. There was also a Star of David written in blood located on the floor of your closet. However, the SIO did affirm there was no evidence of ‘KKK material’ found in your cell as stated in the segregation report and she is unsure why this was stated. … Given that you are in an institution with many different ethnical [sic] groups, this material is identified as offensive and could have potential for jeopardizing the security of the institution.”
A Security Intelligence Officer – what is that when it’s home? It sounds like a political correctness commissar. Now adults can be disciplined for possessing and can be denied “offensive” material that might upset others. One wonders whether a poster of say, Che Guevara or Malcolm X would have been deemed “offensive”, even though they are repugnant to many Whites or anti-communists. What about a pro-abortionist displaying a picture of her hideous hero Dr. Henry Morgenthaler? All rights fly out the window when people are silenced because what they say or have might be deemed “offensive” by someone. So pictures of Nazi Germany are deemed to be “security intelligence worthy.”
It seems the prison had to admit its “information” that Miss Erstikaitis possessed Klan material was wrong, but she got punished anyway.