Saturday, December 29, 2007

Marc Lemire's Appeal to the Federal Court of Canada - January 15, 2008

Marc Lemire’s Appeal to the Federal Court of Canada

January 15, 2008 – 9:30am.  Toronto, Ontario


For the first time ever in history, the Canadian Human Rights Commission is being challenged by Marc Lemire in the Federal Court of Canada for it’s spying operations, abuses of the law, deception and Agent Provocateur agenda.


Like some mobster in a U.S. trial who keep invoking the Fifth Amendment, the CHRC is trying to keep the veil of secrecy wrapped tight around its spying operations on Canadian Internet dissidents. It’s tool of choice is Section 37 of the Canada Evidence Act. This allows government representatives the ability to prevent disclosure (hide) and claim immunity over the disclosure of information that the CHRC alleges to be injurious to Canadian Government security and operations of a Federal agency. The evidence Marc Lemire is challenging before the Federal Court is explosive and will blow the whole agenda of the CHRC into the open.


In a 300 page record, prepared by lead counsel Barbara Kulaszka, the abuse of Section 37 by the Commission was laid out in amazingly clear detail.  Those 300 pages decimate the Canadian Human Rights Commission’s claims and expose the spying operations of Canada’s Thought Control apparatus


Come out and see the top freedom fighters in Canada battle the censors 

Barbara Kulaszka, Douglas Christie, Paul Fromm and Marc Lemire




MapFederal Court

of Canada


January 15, 2008



180 Queen Street W

 Toronto, Ontario



Case: T-860-07


Marc Lemire




Richard Warman, Canadian Human Rights Commission and Attorney General of Canada.





Thursday, December 27, 2007

CHRC Abuse of Section 37 of the Canada Evidence Act to cover-up the misdeeds of the CHRC

CHRC Abuse of Section 37 of the Canada Evidence Act to cover-up the misdeeds of the CHRC

It’s all out war in the Marc Lemire Internet case. The Canadian Human Rights Commission, like some mobster in a U.S. trial who keep invoking the Fifth Amendment, is trying to keep the veil of secrecy wrapped tight around its spying operations on Canadian Internet dissidents. It’s tool of choice is Section 37 of the Canada Evidence Act.

Section 37 reads:

A Minister of the Crown in right of Canada or other official may object to the disclosure of information before a court, person or body with jurisdiction to compel the production of information by certifying orally or in writing to the court, person or body that the information should not be disclosed on the grounds of a specified public interest. If an objection is made under subsection (1), the court, person or body shall ensure that the information is not disclosed other than in accordance with this Act.”

“Public interest” is a sweeping catch-all and can include the safety of any person. The mischievous effect of invoking these magic words – “Section 37” – is that the information cannot be revealed or the question even asked. The only route of appeal is to a Federal Court and that’s where the Marc Lemire Defence Team is now headed.

Cover-up? You bet!

We know, according to Richard Warman’s testimony in Warman v. Jessica Beaumont that a page was downloaded from Stormfront using the sign-in name ”Jadewarr.” Warman testified that he was not “Jadewarr” but that the document was downloaded in his presence by the Commission. When Marc Lemire’s attorney Barbara Kulaszka asked CHRC investigator Dean Steacy whether he knew who “Jadewarr” was, Commission lawyer Giacomo Vigna squelched as answer by invoking Sec. 37.

Similarly, when Miss Kulaszka asked Mr. Steacy whether he’d ever signed on to a political message board and made postings, Mr. Vigna used Sec. 37 to prevent an answer. We know that “Jadewarr” extensively discussed Sec. 13.1 complaints with people on Stormfront and has even tried to engage victim/Respondent Marc Lemire in conversations – perhaps to entrap him?

The Member (Judge) in this Tribunal lawyer Athanasios Hadjis of Montreal expressed serious reservations at Vigna’s wholesale use of Sec. 37 and all but invited the Defence to challenge Vigna in Federal Court: “Don't say it's privilege. It's not privilege, it's 37. It is a large tool that you have chosen to use, and I hope that one day the Federal Court has a chance to assess it.”

Quotes from Member (Judge) in the Marc Lemire case

Athanasios Hadjis

I am asking for some discretion to be utilized by the single party that has this tool in this room.

Transcripts, Page 4429

MR. VIGNA: Mr. Chair, I would raise an objection, again, in terms of the relevance, and also under section 37. This is an ongoing investigation, so section 37 would be --


MS KULASZKA: I don't think that question in any way threatens the Commission.

THE CHAIRPERSON: No, it doesn't. I am going to allow that question. If there is a problem with that, ask somebody upstairs.

Transcripts, Page 4714

But I see your point, Ms Kulaszka. You want to know, if you resolve on 52, is 37 still -- is that sword of Damocles still hanging over your head.

Transcripts, Page: 4388

Amazingly, in the Warman v. Glenn Bahr and Western Canada for Us Tribunal, when Paul Fromm asked Sgt. Stephen Camp whether “Estate” was an Edmonton Police Officer, Sec. 37 was not invoked. Camp eventually admitted “Estate” who had posted inflammatory and racist comments on Stormfront was a police officer. [Subsequently, in Glenn Bahr’s preliminary hearing on Sec. 319 – “hate” – charges, Camp came clean and admitted he was “Estate”]

In the Bahr case, acting as his agent, I originally asked, about the identity of “Estate.” There was a bit of an argument. Camp refused to answer. Vigna them talked about "Section 38 of the Canada Evidence Act" but did not invoke it. More discussion ensued over whether the question was relevant. After it was ruled relevant by Tribunal Charperson Julie Lloyd, Camp returned to testify on the following Monday. During Constable Camps testimony, he revealed that “Estate” was an Edmonton police officer, but refused to identify which officer it was.

The only reference to Section 37 came from. RICHARD WARMAN who said this:

MR. WARMAN: -- the last point I would make is that Sergeant Camp over the break has had an opportunity to speak with his colleagues and superiors at the Edmonton Police Service as well as others -- I won't go into -- he has had a chance to confirm that there are no further ongoing issues in relation to -- we won't be continuing with the Section 37 Canada Evidence Act objection. ( Warman v. Bahr and Western Canada for Us transcript, page 683)

Interestingly, Warman doesn't continue the objection!!! Objections under Section 37 of the Canada Evidence Act can only be invoked and certified by “A Minister of the Crown in right of Canada or other official” Just what on earth is going on here? Does Richard Warman represent a Minister of the Crown or other official? If so why it this not revealed? During most of the testimony Richard Warman has done, he has testified he is doing this on his own initiative, and has no “special relationship” with the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

We are battling a secrecy obsessed Canadian Human Rights Commission bent on throttling dissent on the Internet and equally determined to keep Canadians in the dark about their spy operations. They have all the money and resources. We need your help in this ongoing battle.

Paul Fromm



With edits and content changes by Marc Lemire

CHRC and their relationship with Canadian Police Agencies EXPOSED!

Canadian Human Rights Commission and their relationship with Canadian Police Agencies


Since 2005, the Canadian Human Rights Commission has been secretly expanding their powers into the realm of law enforcement under the guise of “fighting hate”. The thought control maniacs at the CHRC, using Communist style tactics, have been trying to elevate themselves into the level of some sort of National Security Agency.

Unlike Police agencies – the Commission has absolutely no authority to engage in any form of spying operations on Canadian citizens. Yet, through a series of relationships with police agencies they have unprecedented access to Police databases containing the most sensitive and private police files on Canadians.

On May 10, 2007, head internet investigator for the CHRC Dean Steacy admitted, under examination by Barbara Kulaszka , that the Commission has an arrangement with Canadian Police Agencies. When Barbara Kulaszka asked what exactly the arrangement was, Giacomo Vigna for the CHRC invoked Section 37 of the Canada Evidence Act to stop dead all questioning.

Nothing should scare freedom loving Canadians more than the politically motivated thought control apparatus of the Canadian Human Rights Commission having any access to the most sensitive and private information of millions of Canadians.

Recently, it was revealed that the CHRC currently has “indirect” access to the Police CPIC database. CPIC is the acronym for Canadian Police Information

Centre. CPIC is a highly secured computer based police information system.

CPIC contains records such as:

· Home address

· vehicle information,

· dental records,

· identifying marks/scars,

· firearms ownership,

· criminal records,

· fingerprints,

· current surveillance information,

· known aliases,

· medical conditions

· and much more.

The CHRC has numerous times relied on police agencies to analyze data captured in the execution of search warrants on trumped-up alleged criminal “hate” (Sec. 319 of Criminal Code) violations – yet the victims are very rarely ever charged. Instead the evidence seized is later used before Canadian Human Rights Tribunal hearings through testimony given by Police Officers.

We only know the tip of this unholy alliance between the Police and the CHRC. The Federal Court Appeal by Marc Lemire should bring more evidence into the open.

Covert operations on Canadians are no only conducted by the Canadian Human Rights Commission, but also by those that use the Canadian Human Rights Act for possible political means.

Stormfront Infiltrators Exposed:


Stormfront Alias: Estate

Real name: Sgt. Stephen Camp of the Edmonton Police “Hate Crimes” unit


Stormfront Alias: MarkW14

Real Name: Shane Ruttle Martinez (Anti-Racist Action thug, and CHRC witness)


Stormfront Alias: Pogue Mahone

Real name: Richard Warman


Stormfront Alias: Jadewarr

Real name: CHRC Employee

The misnamed Canadian “Human Rights” Commission has been using tax-payers dollars to fund their political vendetta against individuals and websites they hate.

Websites such as The Freedomsite ( – have been the focus of a 3 year legal attack by the Commission to shut it down, over documents such as “The Immigrant Poem”, criticism of immigration and even the awful “hateful” act of posting an unedited copy of the Canadian Human Rights Act on the Freedomsite!

The Commission and complainant Richard Warman are seeking a LIFETIME speech ban placed on Freedomsite webmaster, Marc Lemire along with hefty fines

In what best can be described as sheer lunacy, the CHRC (with ONLY remedial powers and NO police powers) has attempted to elevate itself to the level of a CSIS (National Security Agency), in an ongoing infiltration operation, using shady and secretive tactics to silence and possibly entrap those they don't like. The operatives of the CHRC have said they must get those they don't like "by any means necessary"

Sgt. Stephen Camp of the Edmonton Police “Hate Crimes” unit posting on Stormfront:

· “Anybody read the Edmonton Journal dated January 22? I know it's a kike publication but...”

· With any luck they will end up like the nogs in the states who predominantly kuill each other.”

· In Reference to Native people he wrote: “retarded little ch-g” and "how can u hold the little redskin responsible he's only an animal..."

· “Our corrupt government is nothing but a puppet to this so called multicultural agenda.”

· “This post again re emphasises the point that our tax dollars are waisted on keeping Zundel behind bars, while Muslim extremists are allowed re entry into Canada and free to come and go as they please.

Infiltration Techniques Taught by Jewish Groups to numerous Canadian Police Services

Infiltration of websites such as Stormfront is part of an organized and darker tactic that is now employed by politicized Police agencies and censorship enforcers. The Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center for Holocaust Studies is now offering a new course aimed at Canadian Law enforcement agencies and "investigators" entitled "Investigating Internet Extremism". According to the Wiesenthal Centre’s website:

"The workshop works from the premise that in order for law enforcement to be effective in the arena of hate, it must be proactive rather than reactive." The course description continues "Investigating Internet Hate consists of three components; namely infiltration, Internet tools and legalities. In the first section, police officers are introduced to the most frequented web forums, allowing them to become ‘part of the community’ and investigate varying groups and their activities." [Emphasis added] (Copied from Wiesenthal website:

Among some of the Police forces that the Wiesenthal Centre list as recipients of their "training" includes: Ontario Provincial Police, Owen Sound Police Service, Kingston Police Service, Ottawa Police Service, Barrie Police and the Vancouver Police Service.

Tactics used by police officers, to identify and provide evidence before Canadian Human Rights Tribunal hearings:

  • Police powers of search and seizure of computers and other items
  • Search warrants on peoples homes
  • Motor Vehicle Record searches,
  • CPIC, (Canadian Police Information Centre) searches
  • Telephone record searches,
  • Infiltration of Stormfront using false identities
  • Infiltration of internet based mailing lists
  • Assuming phony identities via e-mail
  • Interrogations after arrest
  • Infiltration of public meetings / demonstrations
  • Tenancy Agreements from Landlords

Police have testified against at a CHRT hearing:

Alexan Kulbashian (Officer Terry Wilson testified)

James Richardson (Officer Terry Wilson testified)

Kouba (Officer Camp testified)

Glenn Bahr (Officer Camp testified)

CHRC victims – raided by Police:

Alexan Kulbashian

James Richardson

Glenn Bahr

Ciarian Donnelly

Jessica Beaumont

Terry Tremaine

Criminally charged:

Alexan Kulbashian (charges later dropped)

James Richardson (charges dropped later)

Glenn Bahr (Section 319 charges outstanding)

Above information is based on a study of all Canadian Human Rights Tribunal Section 13 published decisions since 1992.

Amount of money Richard Warman has been awarded via the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal since 2003.

Total to Oct 27, 2007: $48,500



Case #:


CHRT Ruling:




"Mr. Kyburz shall pay to Mr. Warman the sum of $15,000 as special compensation, pursuant to subsection 54(1)(b) of the Act;

section 14.1 violation:

ii) Mr. Kyburz shall pay to Mr. Warman the sum of $15,000 for Mr. Warman's pain and suffering;



Case #:


CHRT Ruling:



Alexan Kulbashian

$5,000 as special compensation pursuant to s. 54(1)(b)



Case #:


CHRT Ruling:



Tomasz Winnicki

$500 for pain and suffering AND

$5,000 special compensation, pursuant to s. 53(3) of the Act.



Case #:


CHRT Ruling:



Jessica Beaumont

$3,000 in special compensation, pursuant to s. 54(1)(b)

The case of Jessica Beaumont - CHRC Victim

The Slippery Slope of Censorship at the Canadian “Human Rights” Commission

The case of Jessica Beaumont

The following quotes have been found to be a violation of Section 13 of the dictatorial Canadian Human Rights Act (Internet censorship) The following is taken directly out of the Oct 26, 2007 decision of the Canadian “Human Rights” Tribunal in the Warman v. Beaumont case.

(See every Single ruling by the CHRT in a Spreadsheet)

<hr size=1 width="88%" align=center>

[Para. 16] This message was posted on a sub-forum entitled “Let Muslim women keep hijabs on”. The discussion related to a news report that then Prime Minister Paul Martin believed that the practice at Montreal’s airport of requiring Muslim women to remove headscarves as they pass through security screening should be stopped. Ms. Beaumont posted the following comment in this regard:

That drives me nuts, I take photos for the citizenship, passports, pr (permanent residence), visa cards etc. and as I have been told from human resourses that the ears MUST be visable, which means, if your hair covers your ears, it has to be tucked back.

I don’t care if it’s a religious thing or not, if you don’t want to follow our rules, even if it is taking off your scarf thing for one lousy picture, then stay out of my effing country!

[Para. 22] This message was posted on a sub-forum entitled “No Need to Feel Threatened”. One of the participants in this discussion suggested that there was nothing wrong with having “nonwhite” friends. Ms. Beaumont replied to this suggestion as follows:

I just don’t feel the need to be-friend non-whites, as they can do nothing for me, nor would I like to associate with them. I am fine with my own kind, and always will/have been. Theres my f*cking answer. Good enough? If not, PM [private message] me, well debate this some more.

[Para. 29] This message is found on a sub-forum that asked participants what they considered were five things that concerned them as “white Canadian Citizens”. Ms. Beaumont answered the question as follows:

1. Immigration

2. Freedom Of Speech (and everything else)

3. People need to wake up, and grab a sense of morality.

4. People who support “gay marriages” although are not gay, even if they are…. IT’S SICK!

5. Basis of/for Deportation for illegal immigrants (this needs to be followed through with A LOT faster, and more watched)

[ Para 34] This message was posted in a sub-forum about whether same-sex marriage would be recognized in Alberta . Ms. Beaumont’s commentary in this respect was, “I hope Alta never lets those degenerates marry, it’s just vile!

For the above quotes and 24 other comments, Jessica Beaumont was fined: $4,500 and given a Permanent lifetime speech ban (Cease and Decist order) from ever post comments similar. If she posts similar ever again, she may face up to 5 years in prison!

The Canadian Censorship Regime

This decision by Canadian Human Rights Tribunal is yet another nail in the coffin of free speech on the Internet for Canadians brave enough to identify themselves by their own names on Internet websites. It marks an unblemished record of convictions dating back to the 1970’s. No one, yes no one, in the 39 years of thought control Section 13 (1) which once applied to only telephone answering machines but under the guise of “anti-terrorism” was passed by Parliament and now covers the Internet, has ever been acquitted. This fact, as much as anything, bears out the fact that Section 13 is nothing but political thought control.

In Burma or Myanmar or whatever they’re calling that place today, a tyrannical regime beats and jails peaceful monks for expressing their political views and opposition to the powers that be. In Canada , we’re just a little craftier in suppressing dissent or criticism of powerful groups. We beat up on a young woman who had the interest and fortitude to express her views. No slack is shown for spirited, sometimes forceful, even vulgar or in-your-face expressions on Miss Beaumont’s part. She offended the privileged minorities and must be punished. Even if what she said was 100% true, it makes no difference to the thought police. Had Jessica Beaumont been a crack head, party girl with no other interest than her next drug hit, Canada ’s corrosive political correctness would have had no interest in her. In fact, the more brain dead and compliant people are, the more they are mere producing and consuming drones, the more this country seems to like them. Above all, if you have any dissenting notions, “shut up!”

The Canadian Human Rights Commission in Internet cases always picks on victims who are White, right of centre, usually young and almost always poor. The persecution of Jessica Beaumont was no different. She was too poor to retain a lawyer, makes only $10/hour and fined $4,500 with only 120 days to pay!

Who the

CHRC attacks?

Active and Past cases: 46

Cases the tribunal ruled on: 37

Total complaints received by CHRC: 100

· 0% of respondents have ever won a section 13 case before the tribunal.

· 100% of cases have Whites as respondents

· 98% of cases have poor or working class respondents

· 90.7% of respondents are not represented by lawyers

· So far, $93,000 has been awarded in fines and special compensation since 2003.

· 35 respondents have lifetime speech bans (Cease and Desist) orders and if not followed the victims could face up to 5 years in prison.

· 72.4% of complaints specifically identify "jews" as victims.

· 48.8% of all cases are by Richard Warman

What is “Section 13” of the Canadian Human Rights Act?

"Section 13" is Canada 's shameful internet censorship legislation. It makes it a “discriminatory practice” of the Canadian Human Rights Act "for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate ... any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt ... " against a host of privileged groups. Such as race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, etc.

“Contempt” is so vague it can literally cover almost all forms of criticism. According to past Tribunal ruling, truth is no defence, it only matters if someone's feelings were allegedly hurt. There are ZERO defences. The head Internet investigator for the CHRC, when asked about Freedom of Speech testified that: "Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don't give it any value."

If found guilty of a Section 13 violation:

*Permanent (lifetime) speech ban will be registered with the Federal Court. If found in violation could face up to 5 years in prison

*Fines of up to $50,000 per named respondent


Biased and Unfair TRUTH is NO Defence 100% Convictions Lifetime Speech bans

Censors ...