Warman & CHRC =NAZIS- Zionist News+Jew Levant
noauth
Zionist News + Jewish Lawyer Blast CHRC & Warman - As NAZIS!
Zionist owned newspaper National Post, and noted jurist
Ezra Levant have blasted the Canadian Human Rights Commission,
and pet complainer thereof Richard Warman.
They are being denounced as NAZIS!
In a banner-headline huge editorial in the National Post,
across Canada,on Wednesday July 15 2009, lawyer Ezra Levant
really lays into CHRC and criminal Richard Warman.
Levant starts with a denunciation of the criminal activities
of CHRC, as exposed at the CHRC hearing March 25 2008.
At that time Alain Monfette Bell Canada security officer, had
testified that CHRC had illegally accessed the internet, using
the private account of an innocent woman, Nelly Hechme.
Marc Lemire has in fact laid criminal charges against CHRC
in connection with these criminal acts.
In his editorial, Lawyer Ezra Levant further denounces CHRC and
Richard Warman as NAZIS!
Levant states that CHRC members have been active members of
neo-nazi groups for years.
Further he states that they have published countless anti-semitic,
anti-gay and anti-black comments on the internet.
CHRC have even admitted these criminal acts under oath!
Dean Steacy, a senior CHRC member has testified that at least
7 CHRC staff are members of nazi groups.
Especially noted is that former CHRC investigator and current
serial witness and perpetual complainer RICHARD WARMAN is a
prominent NAZI among the seven!!
The tribunal investigating the illegal and criminal acts of CHRC
4 months ago, was forced to issue a damning report on the illegal
activities of CHRC and Warman:
"I do not see any acceptable reason for [Richard] Warman to have
participated on the Stormfront or Vanguard [neo-nazi] sites."
It appears that CHRC has more NAZI members than did the
Canadian Nazi Party when it existed briefly in the 1960's.
Neo-Nazi hate, courtesy of the CHRC
Ezra Levant, National Post Published: Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Last month, a parliamentary committee invited Jennifer Lynch, the head of
the Canadian Human Rights Commission, to answer questions about her
agency's conduct. She refused to attend, sending in her place a deputy who
could not answer key questions put to him by MP Russ Hiebert.
Now that Parliament is safely on summer holidays, Lynch has bravely
emerged from her bunker -- the CHRC office actually is a bulletproof
bunker -- to accuse Hiebert of getting his facts wrong.
But it's Lynch's version that's false.
In her July 11 letter to the National Post, Lynch denies that CHRC staff
hacked into the Internet account of a private citizen to cover their
tracks as they logged into their memberships in neo-Nazi websites. Lynch
says both the Privacy Commissioner and the RCMP "found no evidence to
support this allegation."
But that's not true. The Privacy Commissioner's staff did not investigate
the hacking -- that is not within their jurisdiction. They only examined
"whether the CHRC improperly collected, used, disclosed or retained
personal information about the complainant," a different and irrelevant
question.
And neither did the RCMP declare that there was "no evidence" to the
accusation. They investigated for months. Only when the case led them to a
U. S.-based Internet server did they drop their investigation rather than
pursue it internationally. That's quite a different thing from exonerating
the CHRC.
There was a hearing into the matter, though, at the Canadian Human Rights
Tribunal on March 25, 2008. Alain Monfette, Bell Canada's security
officer, testified that the CHRC accessed the Internet using that private
citizen's Bell account. Lynch's lawyers sat in embarrassed silence -- they
did not rebut Monfette's evidence nor even bother to cross-examine him.
As Nelly Hechme, the hacking victim, told reporters, "I merely wanted some
answers and maybe a little justice, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
I feel like I'm basically being told to just accept it."
Lynch is pretending that Hechme doesn't even exist. But that pales in
comparison to Lynch's statement that CHRC staff did not "post hateful
messages on the Internet."
In fact, CHRC employees have been active members of neo-Nazi organizations
for years, and have published countless anti-Semitic, anti-gay and anti-
black comments online. CHRC employees have admitted to this under oath. On
the same day Monfette testified about the hacking, CHRC investigator Dean
Steacy testified there were no guidelines about what CHRC staff could do
using their online Nazi memberships.
Steacy, for example, used his Nazi membership to write encouraging words
to a racist group called B. C. White Pride. He praised them, told them
their racist posters were "great" and promised to distribute their
literature. Your tax dollars at work.
Other CHRC investigators went further. One praised Nazi leaders ( "I still
say [Adrien] Arcand is our man!"); called for Canadian police to
discriminate against blacks ( "exactly when will white cops understand
that they should stand by THEIR race?!"); and trashed a Jewish youth group
( "if people spent the time building fellow WNs [White Nationalists] up
rather than tearing them down we'd be dangerous. Unless your goal is to
tear people down in which case go join Hillel or something.")
Neo-Nazi hate, courtesy of the CHRC
Ezra Levant, National Post Published: Wednesday, July 15, 2009
At least 12 CHRC prosecutions have been tainted by CHRC staff or witnesses
using agent provocateur tactics like that. They've even written Nazi
shorthand for "Heil Hitler".
Steacy testified that at least seven CHRC staff have access to Nazi
membership accounts: Steacy himself, his two personal assistants,
investigator Sandy Kozak, lawyer Giacomo Vigna, manager John Chamberlin,
and former CHRC investigator and current serial witness and complainant
Richard Warman.
By sheer numbers, the Canadian Human Rights Commission has more Nazi
members than the tiny Canadian Nazi Party did when it briefly existed in
the 1960s.
If real police and prosecutors behaved this way, they would be suspended
and any criminal charges tainted by such misconduct would be stayed. Not
so at the CHRC, which lacks an internal affairs office or written
operational policies. It doesn't even have a code of ethics.
It's become so embarrassing that even the tribunal -- the kangaroo court
that rubber-stamps CHRC censorship prosecutions -- has ended its silence.
Four months ago, the tribunal examined some of these comments, including
one denouncing Jewish politicians as "scum."
"I do not see any acceptable reason for [Richard] Warman to have
participated on the Stormfront or Vanguard [neo-Nazi] sites," wrote the
tribunal. "It is possible that his activity in this regard could have
precipitated further hate messages in response ... The evidence in this
case of his participating on Internet sites similar to the Northern
Alliance [neo-Nazi] site is both disappointing and disturbing."
It's a scandal that the CHRC joins Nazi groups on the taxpayers' dime. But
instead of recognizing the problem and fixing it, Lynch is trying to cover
it up.
The Prime Minister needs to intervene. It's time Stephen Harper fired
everyone with a Nazi membership at the CHRC, along with the woman who is
permitting their bigotry. - Ezra Levant blogs at ezralevant.com
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 00:53:30 -0400
Subject: Fwd: *** RCMP release documents on the CHRC Criminal Hacking
Investigation ***
From: Paul Fromm <pa...@paulfromm.com>
RCMP release documents on the CHRC Criminal Hacking Investigation
Investigation dropped due to jurisdictional issues with the United States
And the RCMP investigates Lemire for daring to complain
http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/july18-09_rcmp_access_req.html
In late June, 2009, the RCMP responded to an Access to Information
request filed by human rights activist Marc Lemire for all documents
surrounding the criminal investigation of the Canadian Human Rights
Commission and their theft of an innocent woman�s internet connection.
The evidence showing that the CHRC hacked into the internet connection
of Nelly Hechme came to light as a result of evidence subpoenaed by
Marc Lemire. The evidence was sworn testimony by Alain Monfette from
Bell Canada�s Law Enforcement Team and examination of CHRC employees
during a May 2008 Canadian Human Rights Tribunal hearing.
The heavily censored documents released by the RCMP show that the recent
statements made by the Canadian Human Rights Commission�s Chief Commissioner
Jennifer Lynch were inaccurate and misleading. Lynch wrote in July 11,
2009�s National Post that �Mr. Hiebert says there is uncontradicted expert
evidence that a commission employee illegitimately used the Internet
connection of a third party. Two independent investigations, one by the
RCMP expert unit responsible for computer crimes, and one by the Privacy
Commissioner of Canada, found no evidence to support this allegation.�
Highlights from RCMP Documents
The RCMP found the case to be �Complete � Unsolved�
The RCMP could not pursue the case because evidence trail lead to the
United States where RCMP has no authority and no MLAT existed to compel
information
After a message from CHRC�s lawyer Kathleen Fawcett, the RCMP turned around
and investigated Lemire for daring to lay the complaint. RCMP censored what
the message from CHRC said.
As part of the CHRC rebuttal to the charges, they submitted their own copy
of the March 2009 Transcript, which has been found to be highly questionable
and �missing� key testimony.
The RCMP found that the distance from the CHRC offices to the WiFi access
point of Nelly Hechme was only a mere 400 meters (across an open field)
The RCMP saw this investigation as highly political and had multiple printouts
from Ezra Levants website, articles from the National Post and other internet
websites.
Multiple CHRC employees were involved in case and �liaised� with the RCMP.
This included the manager of the CHRC�s IT dept.
The Ottawa Police reviewed the case, accepted it, and forwarded it to the RCMP,
who had more expertise in federal matters.
All RCMP Documents
Detailed analysis of the RCMP documents
This is the general summary of the RCMP�s investigation of the Canadian
Human Rights Commission.
Notice the �Clearance status� shows the investigation by the RCMP as
�Complete � unsolved�
In the summary, the RCMP notes that �Matter was investigated by OPS
[Ottawa Police Service] but follow-up is now done by A Div ITCU
[Integrated Technical Crime Unit � RCMP].� This shows that the
Ottawa Police Service investigated the case, accepted it, and
sent it onto the Integrated Technical Crime Unit of the RCMP
because it involved a Federal Government Agency.
At the Ottawa Police Service, the complaint was investigated by Martin
Dompierre. Detective/Forensic Examiner. Criminal Investigative Services. High
Tech Crime Unit. Ottawa Police Service.
The summary continues: �Investigation completed as of 2008-11-10 reveals not
enough evidence to pursue charges.�
As described in more detail below, the RCMP were not able to use sworn legal
affidavits provided by the owner of Stormfront, because the affidavit was not
collected pursuant to a Canada / USA �MLAT�, which is a Mutual Legal Assistance
in Criminal Matters Treaty.
�MLAT� agreements with the USA are generally only implemented for serious
criminal matters, such as murder, child exploitation or kidnapping, because
it involves getting many different agencies involved, including provincial
Attorney Generals.
During the course of the investigation, the officer met with RCMP lawyer
Christine Morris of IPOC (Integrated Proceeds of Crime division - RCMP)
who specializes in multi-jurisdictional investigations. Any MLAT request
by the police have to be reviewed and vetted by an IPOC counsel, who then
submits it to IAG (International Assistance Group - part of the Department
of Justice Criminal Law Branch) [See Department of Justice - The Federal
Prosecution Service Handbook at
http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/dept-min/pub/fps-sfp/fpd/ch43.html#43_6_3 ]
While the specific recommendations of Morris were censored, it would seem to
be that, as a result of that meeting, the affidavit and other sworn legal
information provided from the United States were not allowed to be used as
evidence in the criminal investigation of the CHRC.
In a RCMP�s �Briefing Note: Theft of telecommunications � CHRC,� the RCMP
officer wrote that: �The information obtained from Marc Lemire were obtained
without legal authorization and involved the USA country. To use the evidence,
it would require that an MLAT be obtained and executed.�
Thus without that information about the IP address CHRC investigator Dean Steacy
(Internet codename: JADEWARR) used when he accessed the Stormfront website as
�Jadewarr�, there was a limited chance of the likelihood of a successful
prosecution.
RCMP investigate Marc Lemire for daring to complain about CHRC
One of the most shocking revelations to come out of the RCMP documents is that
the RCMP actually investigated Marc Lemire for daring to lay the criminal
complaint against the CHRC!
Only a few weeks before the RCMP was going to close the case, they received
�a message from Kathleen FAWCETT, lawyer at the CHRXCH� [Canadian Human Rights
Commission]. The contents of the message sent by the CHRC�s lawyer were
censored from the report, but the RCMP immediately turned around and
investigated Lemire.
The report stated �writer [RCMP Sgt. Stephane Turgeon] requested the assistance
of DCAU for a background check of COM LEMIRE, Marc.� The �DCAU� is the RCMP�s
�DIVISION CRIMINAL ANALYTICAL UNIT.�, which performs CPIC checks on Canadians.
CPIC is an acronym for the Canadian Police Information Centre.
The RCMP administers this database and says that CPIC �is a computerized system
that provides tactical information about crimes and criminals.�
This is the most highly secure police database in Canada and holds private
details on some 10 million Canadians.
The CPIC computer has four data banks: Investigative, Identification,
Intelligence and Ancillary. Contained in those four data banks are:
Vehicles: License information, including validation tags, stolen, abandoned
or wanted in connection to a crime.
Persons: Persons wanted by the police or accused persons; persons on probation
or parole; persons against whom prohibition orders have been placed (e.g.
driving, possession of firearms); missing persons, including children; body
marks/scars;
clothing and dental records or body parts that can be cross-referenced; amnesia,
comatose or disaster victims.
Property: Stolen guns, articles and securities.
Marine: Stolen and abandoned boats and boat motors.
Dental Characteristics: Individual dental records (a sub-system of Persons File)
Canada Firearms Registry: Every Canadian owning a firearm or having a license.
Cross-referenced with every gun serial number to registered owner (this alone
contains over 10 million records)
Criminal Records: Full criminal record information.
Criminal Record Synopsis: Condensed version of criminal records supported by
fingerprints maintained by the RCMP�s Information and Identification Services.
CPIC Surveillance: Contains criminal intelligence information and information
on persons, vehicles and boats which are under surveillance.
So, what lies did the CHRC spin for the RCMP to do an about-face and parse
through Marc Lemire�s most intimate details, which could include information
from his dental records to marks/scars to his vehicle information?
Unfortunately, the RCMP completely censored what the CHRC�s lawyer said, but
based on the CHRC past paranoid ranting on �security,� it is easy to make an
educated guess.
Through out the entire human rights hearing against Marc Lemire, the CHRC
constantly used the sphere of alleged �security threats� to stifle the defence
that Lemire was putting up. In order to keep the lid on the CHRC spying
operations, they even tried to have Lemire banned from his own hearing, using
the fraudulent accusations of �security threats.� [CHRT ruling � Para 15-17]
CHRC lawyers � spinning tales of threats and imaginary security breaches � used
this tactic as a way to block hundreds of questions by invoking �national
security�
and Section 37 of the Canada Evidence Act, which stopped dead all answers to
questions. Looking back now, it is clear that the CHRC invoked Section 37 to
cover up their abuse and misdeeds. It had nothing to due with security at all.
For instance, the CHRC invoked Section 37 to stop all questions about the
�Jadewarr� account, which was used by CHRC employees to infiltrate websites and
post messages.
The CHRC screamed security! Security! Security! over any questions about
�Jadewarr�. Now that the answers have been revealed, the utter abuses of
�security� claims are
clear and documented.
The CHRC have used false claims of �security� so often � to hide everything they
were doing � even the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal became disgusted by their
abusive behavior.
In 2008, the Tribunal chastised the CHRC for their numerous groundless claims of
�security.� The Tribunal ruled that:
�[9] The outcome of the [Marc Lemire�s Federal Court Appeal to] s. 37 matter
gives me pause to question the soundness of the Commission's invocation of
public security concerns with respect to the testimony of these witnesses.�
The Canadian Human Rights Commission is shameless and has proven in the past,
they are willing to do and say anything to protect their censorship franchise.
Is it really hard to believe that the CHRC would call up the RCMP and spin some
imaginary tale of terror, in order to throw the RCMP off their dirty corrupt
scent?
Or perhaps the CHRC could just sign onto to one of the many websites they have
memberships on and post a �violent threat� themselves, then use it as
justification
to get Lemire. It all might sound pretty conspiratorial... BUT the CHRC does
have
a proven track record of calling up police agencies and having them investigate
people who dare to file complaints against them or their friends.
Perhaps the CHRC was trying to stop the 9 months straight of negative publicity
they were receiving as a result of being under the cloud of a criminal
investigation?
By having the RCMP do the dirty, and investigate every detail of Lemire�s life
in
hopes that they might find something. After all, it would have been a great
coup
de grace to have Lemire charged with some criminal offence in the end.
Then Jennifer Lynch and her cronies could do their usual finger wagging
diversion
and point to Lemire and say, �see he�s the criminal.... not us!�
On an interesting side note, if Lemire was a criminal or corrupt, he would
easily
be able to get a nice cushy job at the CHRC in the future� After all, the CHRC
and
ethics don�t mix.
For background information on the hacking allegations made against the CHRC and
the criminal complaint filed with the RCMP, please see:
March 26/08: CHRC Operatives Hack Unsecured Wireless Access point to Post Hate
Messages!
March 26/08: Lid Blown Off Commission Internet Spying in Lemire Case
May 17/08: UPDATE: on Criminal Complaint against Canadian Human Rights
Commission
for Stealing innocent woman's internet connection
April 18/08: Privacy Act complaint filed against Canadian �Human Rights�
Commission
for unauthorized use of an Internet connection
April 10/08: Motion for Disclosure of CHRC fake names and to reopen hearing over
CHRC WiFi Hacking
June 6/08: CHRC Transcript Irregularities [See YouTube video here]
Nov 21/08: Criminal Complaint against CHRC: Evidence leads to the USA, where the
RCMP can�t follow up. RCMP won't investigate further
Jan 30/09: Privacy Commissioner rules on CHRC WiFi Hacking Allegations after a
shockingly poor investigation
Link: http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/july18-09_rcmp_access_req.html
It appears that CHRC has more NAZI members than did the
Canadian Nazi Party when it existed briefly in the 1960's.
The Prime Minister of Canada needs to act - NOW.
Fire all the nazi criminals involved at CHRC,
and prosecute them criminally - before Remembrance Day.
Otherwise, for what did all the millions die, fighting the nazis?
Perhaps the Israel Mossad should take care of these nazis, permanently,
as they did with the Munich terrorists, Eichmann et al?
Since Israelis are now searching the world for body parts, perhaps they
could pick up Richard Warman and his nazi colleagues and use them for
body parts/organ harvesting? If parts are not good enough, then they
can always use for medical experiments...
Warman and his gang of nazis must have some usable body parts,
for the body-snatchers.
Now that Marc Lemire has kicked the CHRC in the balls,
with the admission by CHRC that some of its' rulings are
illegal and contravene the Charter of Rights & Freedoms,
what will Warman then do for a living - wash dishes?
And, now that an Appeal is filed against CHRC & Warman
regarding some ill-gotten money from another victim, will
Warman finally be charged and convicted for his criminal acts?
For the real TRUTH about ZHIDS, visit the world top-rated website
for JEW-WATCH:
http://www.jewwatch.com
Other useful websites include:
ZUNDELSITE - www.zundelsite.org
IHR - www.ihr.org
Stormfront - http://www.stormfront.org
KenM...@vex.net
Picture of disgusting pervert at:
http://www.protocol.gov.bc.ca/protocol/prgs/obc/1995/1995_Kenneth_McVay.jpg
Ken McVay invites callers,and visitors,to his homosexuals escorts
office: VISIT at:
#5 - 1601 - Bowen Road, Nanaimo, B.C., Canada, or my home at:
Apt. 3108 - 995 Bowen Road, Nanaimo, B.C., Canada
or call: 1-250-616-9431
Feel free to subscribe McVay to mail lists for sex,
homosexuals and the like.
Grosvenor may be gone, but others are now taking up his campaigns.
Kenneth McVay OBC
noauth <an...@remailer.gabrix.ath.cx> wrote:
>Ken McVay OBC < kmc...@shell.vex.net > wants all to know:
Updated Grosvenor Legal Documents & Extortion conviction:
http://William-Grosvenor.info
Grosvenor's latest legal challenge:
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2008/2008canlii57728/2008canlii57728.html
Warman v. Grosvenor Judgment
Ontario Superior Court of Justice, October 21, 2008
For two years, Edmonton resident William Grosvenor engaged
in a virtual campaign of terror against Ottawa human rights
lawyer Richard Warman. Grosvenor bombarded the Internet with
calls to murder Warman while providing his home address, and
links to pictures of him and Google maps on how to get to his
home. Combined with this were hundreds of online postings
attempting to destroy Warman's personal and professional
reputation.
Now a judge of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has
granted an injunction to put an end to it and has awarded Warman
$50,000 in damages for defamation and assault, the latter
stemming from Grosvenor's death threats and incitement to
violence. These threats of violence repeatedly called for
Warman's murder, described him as a "Dead Jew walking", and said:
"I AM GOD AND I HAVE A RUGER P-90 AND IT'S BULLETS HAVE YOUR NAME
ON THEM FAGBOY WARMAN?." [sic]
In her decision issued 20 October 2008, Justice Lynn
Ratushny found that despite Grosvenor having filed papers saying
he intended to defend the civil suit, he never did and was thus
deemed to have admitted the allegations against him. Instead of
defending the action, the day after being served with the
statement of claim on 15 Jan. 2008 , Grosvenor began sending
waves of emails to Warman's personal email address repeating his
online threats and libel.
Justice Ratushny described Grosvenor's defamatory postings
as "vicious, profane and extreme". She found they were made
dishonestly and in knowing or reckless disregard for the truth,
and said it amounted to "highly reprehensible misconduct". sHe
went on to note the level of hatred and anger contained in
Grosvenor's threats. Justice Ratushny said Grosvenor's efforts to
target Warman for violence, including repeatedly providing his
home address during a two-year period, took them beyond empty
threats and meant they had to be taken seriously.
Warman is an Ottawa lawyer who has successfully filed and
litigated 14 cases against members of the white supremacist and
neo-Nazi movements under the Canadian Human Rights Act provisions
prohibiting the spreading of hate propaganda through the
Internet.
Responding to the decision, Warman said "I'm hugely
relieved that the injunction has been granted and hope this will
bring an end to this two-year long nightmare." He continued, "I
wish I had never heard of William Grosvenor, but if someone is
going to encourage people to kill me then I'm going to see what I
can do to stop them."
The terms of the injunction granted by Justice Ratushny at
paragraph 92 of her judgement reference the submissions of the
plaintiff at subparas. 119(c-f). These sub-paragraphs require
Grosvenor to issue a complete retraction of the defamatory
comments; take all reasonable steps to remove them and his
threats from the Internet; prohibit him from publishing further
defamatory material or incitement to violence; and also from
contacting or communicating with Warman in any way.
The specific terms are:
119(c) granting a mandatory injunction requiring the
Defendant Mr. Grosvenor to make a complete public retraction of
the defamatory comments;
119(d) granting a mandatory injunction requiring Mr.
Grosvenor to make all reasonable efforts to remove from the
internet, the entirety of any and all of the internet postings
that he has published or caused to be published, and which are
defamatory to the Plaintiff, and/or which invade the Plaintiff's
privacy and/or which threaten to harm or kill the Plaintiff
and/or contain invitations and encouragements to harm or kill the
Plaintiff, whether by using the Plaintiff's name, nick-name,
address, photograph or other means of identity;
119(e) granting a permanent injunction restraining the
Defendant Mr. Grosvenor, and/or any other persons acting for the
Defendant, from publishing, causing to be published, posting, or
reposting on the internet or by any other method or medium,
either in Mr. Grosvenor's own name, under any nick-name,
pseudonym or aliases that he now uses, has used, or may use in
the future, any words which are defamatory to the Plaintiff,
and/or which invade the Plaintiff's privacy and/or which threaten
to harm or kill the Plaintiff and/or contain invitations and
encouragements to harm or kill the Plaintiff, whether by using
the Plaintiff's name, nick-name, address, photograph or other
means of identity; and prohibiting Mr. Grosvenor from publishing
or causing to be published any such words about Mr. Warman,
anonymously, or in the name of another person;
199(f) restraining Mr. Grosvenor from contacting or
communicating directly or indirectly with Mr. Warman, in any way
or by any method;
--
"Streicher commit suicide while in the Nuremberg Jail But you
people did hang him after that"
(Kurt Knoll, Kitimat, B.C.'s Leading Revisionist Moron)
The Nizkor Project: http://www.nizkor.org/
George Orwell
http://www.freedomsite.org/legal/july18-09_rcmp_access_req.html
Highlights from RCMP Documents
Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it
M I Wakefield
"George Orwell" <nob...@mixmaster.it> wrote in message
news:0f421d0c1832b5b9...@mixmaster.it...
> Grosvenor may be gone, but others are now taking up his campaigns.
Grosvenor: setting up a new sock-puppet does not count as you being gone,
or as others taking up your campaign.
Kenneth McVay OBC
Grosvenor's latest legal challenge:
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2008/2008canlii57728/2008canlii57728.html
Grosvenor is rumoured to have fled Canada, leaving his wife
behind, in order to avoid his legal responsibilities. While
unsubstantiated, such behavior would be consistent with his
public cowardice.
--
"Rumours also has it the letter was written on an unknown typewriter
in about 1950 but the letter was send to the state department about in 1940."
(Message-ID: m7_Ah.1010750$R63.692769@pd7urf1no, by Kurt Knoll, Kitimat,
B.C.'s Leading Revisionist Scholar)