---------- Original message ----------
From: "MinFinance / FinanceMin (FIN)" <fin.minfinance-financemin.
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2020 03:21:38 +0000
Subject: RE: Methinks the lawyers Pantea Jafari, Michael Greene and
Len Saunders should verify these documents then call me back N'esy Pas
Rob Moorre?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
The Department of Finance acknowledges receipt of your electronic
correspondence. Please be assured that we appreciate receiving your
comments.
Le ministère des Finances accuse réception de votre correspondance
électronique. Soyez assuré(e) que nous apprécions recevoir vos
commentaires.
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2020 23:14:28 -0400
Subject: Methinks the lawyers Pantea Jafari, Michael Greene and Len Saunders
should verify these documents then call me back N'esy Pas Rob Moorre?
To: info@jafarilaw.ca, mgreene@sgimm.ca, media@blaineimmigration.com,
Sophia.Harris@cbc.ca, Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca, Bill.Morneau@canada.ca,
Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca,
<mark.vespucci@ci.irs.gov>, jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca,
mcu@justice.gc.ca, carl.urquhart@gnb.ca, pm@pm.gc.ca,
mcu@justice.gc.ca, carl.urquhart@gnb.ca, pm@pm.gc.ca,
Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca, Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca,
rob.moore@parl.gc.ca
Cc: motomaniac333@gmail.com, washington.field@ic.fbi.gov,
Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Boston.Mail@ic.fbi.gov,
barbara.massey@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
https://davidraymondamos3.
Monday, 16 December 2019
Canadians travelling to or through U.S. should pay close attention to
their withering rights
rob.moore@parl.gc.ca
Cc: motomaniac333@gmail.com, washington.field@ic.fbi.gov,
Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Boston.Mail@ic.fbi.gov,
barbara.massey@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
https://davidraymondamos3.
Monday, 16 December 2019
Canadians travelling to or through U.S. should pay close attention to
their withering rights
https://twitter.com/
David Raymond Amos @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos @Kathryn98967631 and 49 others
Methinks the lawyers Pantea Jafari, Michael Greene and Len Saunders should verify these documents then call me back N'esy Pas?
https://www.scribd.com/doc/2718120/integrity-yea-right
https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/12/canadians-travelling-to-or-through-us.html
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/preclearance-act-federal-government-u-s-border-1.5429662
http://jafarilaw.ca/our-team/
Pantea Jafari
2093 Larry Uteck Blvd
Bedford, NS B4B 1E2
Phone: 902 800-9040
Toronto: 416 825-0650
Email: info@jafarilaw.ca
http://sherrittgreene.com/ourlawyers/michael-greene-q-c/
Michael Greene, Q.C.
301 Mount Royal Village
1550 8th Street SW
Calgary, AB T2R 1K1
Phone: 403 298 0479
Email: mgreene@sgimm.ca
https://www.blaineimmigration.com/about.html
Leonard D.M. Saunders
435 Martin Street, Suite 1010
Blaine, Washington
98230 USA
Phone 360 332-7100
Email: media@blaineimmigration.com
'I'm appalled': Lawyers alarmed as Ottawa gives more powers to U.S. border officers at Canadian airports
Federal government said new rules enhance border security and make U.S. travel easier
The changes are part of Canada's new preclearance act, which the federal government says will enhance border security and make travel to the U.S. easier.
But Pantea Jafari, an Iranian-Canadian immigration lawyer, fears it could make travel more difficult for her.
That's because the act gives U.S. customs officers in Canada broader interrogation powers — at a time when the U.S. has toughened its stance on immigration and has increasingly hostile relations with Iran.
"I will not allow a border officer to have access to me and have unfettered right to question me to no end," said Jafari, who's based in Toronto and serves many Iranian clients.
Since the preclearance act took effect in August, she has stopped travelling to the U.S. and says the country's current standoff with Iran has only strengthened her resolve.
"My concerns of going to the U.S. have now 100 times increased."
Toronto immigration lawyer Pantea Jafari had laid out her concerns about the new preclearance act at a Senate committee hearing in 2017. (Senate of Canada)
Preclearance act explained
Canada's new preclearance act overrides a previous agreement with the United States that allowed travellers to clear U.S. customs in preclearance zones at Canadian airports, before flying across the border. Eight major Canadian airports already have preclearance areas — and the new act paves the way for more zones involving all modes of transport.
Proponents say preclearance offers many benefits, including allowing Canadians to clear U.S. customs in their own country.
"They land in the U.S. as a domestic passenger, so you don't have to go through long lineups," said Gerry Bruno, co-chair of the Beyond Preclearance Coalition, an industry group supporting efficient Canada-U.S. border travel.
A scene from a preclearance explainer video showing the benefits of clearing U.S. customs, before actually flying into the country. (Toronto Pearson Airport/YouTube)
While they don't dispute the benefits of preclearance, some immigration lawyers claim the new act could jeopardize Canadian rights.
The big concern is that American preclearance officers could now further interrogate Canadians who withdraw their application to enter the U.S., perhaps because they feel uncomfortable during a customs inspection.
Previously, law-abiding travellers could simply leave and return home, because they were still on Canadian soil.
Now they could be detained — even handed over to Canadian authorities to face charges — for refusing to answer questions about why they're withdrawing.
"You say, 'I think you're racially profiling me and I'm offended. I don't want to go to your country, I want to leave,'" said Calgary-based immigration lawyer Michael Greene. "[U.S. officers are] entitled to examine those reasons and if they think you're not being truthful, they're entitled to detain you."
Government defends changes
Jafari said the new rules are especially troubling for racialized populations, such as those of Middle Eastern descent, who could be targeted for questioning.
"We're the ones that are deemed the threat, right; the domestic threat of some sort that they need to data mine."
Public Safety Canada said the withdrawal rules were revamped to prevent bad actors from probing preclearance zones in search of a weak entry point.
He added that U.S. preclearance officers questioning travellers who opt to withdraw can't "unreasonably delay" them.
But what constitutes an "unreasonable" delay could be open to interpretation, argues Greene.
"When you look at it from the U.S. perspective of wanting to protect the security of the country, that could result in some very extensive questioning," he said.
Protected by Canadian rights?
Bruno said that law-abiding travellers shouldn't encounter problems at the preclearance zones, and maintains that it beats clearing customs in the U.S., where you "can't withdraw."
"You're there. You're subject to U.S. laws," he said.
U.S. preclearance officers in Canada must follow Canadian laws, including the charter and Human Rights Act. In 2017, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made this point when defending the new act — before it had become law.
"There is extra protection," he told The Canadian Press.
However, Canada's privacy commissioner has argued that protection appears to be "hollow" due to Canada's State Immunity Act, which grants the U.S. government immunity in most cases.
"A Canadian who believes a U.S. customs official has broken Canadian law has little recourse in the courts," states the Office of the Privacy Commissioner's website.
Right to strip-search?
Immigration lawyers are also concerned that under the new act, U.S. preclearance officers can now strip-search Canadian travellers.
Public Safety spokesperson Warmington said that U.S. officers must have reasonable grounds to do the search and that it will only happen in rare circumstances "where Canadian [border] officers are unable to respond or decline."
Immigration lawyer Len Saunders said he's been swamped with calls from Canadians distraught and confused over receiving a five-year ban at a Canada-U.S. land crossing. He's now worried about what might happen in airport preclearance zones.
Immigration lawyer Len Saunders said his concerns with the act are compounded by the fact that some customs officers appear to be getting tougher at U.S. land crossings along the country's northern border.
In 2019, U.S. Customs and Border Patrol doled out almost double the number of five-year bans to travellers crossing from Canada, compared to 2018.
"I'm appalled by what the Canadian government has agreed to."
Travellers who feel mistreated can submit feedback to a "preclearance consultative group" set up to provide oversight, said Warmington.
He also pointed out that Canadian customs officers will have equal powers in U.S. preclearance zones.
Canada currently has no preclearance zones in the U.S., but Warmington said the government is "exploring the potential."
About the Author
3775 Comments
Commenting is now closed for this story.
Chuck Bremner
I'm not appalled or alarmed. Although if it cuts into the revenue stream
of lawyers, that could be a problem.
David Raymond Amos
Content disabled
Reply to @Chuck
Bremner: Methinks what you say is true but if the lawyers Pantea Jafari,
Michael Greene and Len Saunders were wise they would ask Sophia Harris
and Tim Warmington to verify these documents then call me back N'esy
Pas?
https://www.scribd.com/doc/2718120/integrity-yea-right
https://www.scribd.com/doc/2718120/integrity-yea-right
William Kennedy
The disgustingly milquetoast Canadian politicians green lighting even more USA bullying and intrusion in Canada should be repudiated and fired this day.
Don Cheer
Reply to @William Kennedy:
If you don't like US bullying tactics then don't go to the US
Pretty simple to me
If you are in pre-clearance you have intent to enter the US
If you don't like pre-clearance then don't, feel free to us an airport that doesn't offer it or drive across.
The "this is Canadian soil" is bunk, you are intending on entering the US so expect to be treated as such.
Don't like it, don't go
If you don't like US bullying tactics then don't go to the US
Pretty simple to me
If you are in pre-clearance you have intent to enter the US
If you don't like pre-clearance then don't, feel free to us an airport that doesn't offer it or drive across.
The "this is Canadian soil" is bunk, you are intending on entering the US so expect to be treated as such.
Don't like it, don't go
David Raymond Amos
David Raymond Amos
Reply to @Don Cheer:
Would you say such things if you had a wife and kids living in the USA
whom you could not return to live with since 2005?
John Sollows
I'm with Jafari. What does giving American border officers the right to detain us on Canadian soil do for Canada?
Do our folks have the same rights in the U.S.?
Show 15 older replies
Glen Spryszak
Reply to @Art Rowe:
It's about drumming up business by an unknown lawyer. Free advertising ....
Don Cheer
Reply to @John Sollows:
The law gives them the right
You gave them the right when you intended to enter into the US
If you have no intention of entering the US then the US can not detain you at pre-clearance
Pretty simple
If you have an issue with pre-clearance then use a land crossing or airport that doesn't offer it
The law gives them the right
You gave them the right when you intended to enter into the US
If you have no intention of entering the US then the US can not detain you at pre-clearance
Pretty simple
If you have an issue with pre-clearance then use a land crossing or airport that doesn't offer it
David Raymond Amos
Reply to @glen
spryszak : I want to agree but methinks I should be fair and wait to see
if the lawyer and her cohorts return my calls and answer my email If
not then the fat lady will sing to me about the same news I read exactly
one month ago about our withering rights N'esy Pas?
Bradley J Smith Jr
I thought it was suppose to be the Conservatives not Liberals that were American lap dogs. Too funny.
Don Cheer
Reply to @Bradley J Smith Jr:
Not sure how this makes anyone a lap dog
The person at pre-clearance has the full intention of entering the US
That person should expect to be treated as such
Not sure how this makes anyone a lap dog
The person at pre-clearance has the full intention of entering the US
That person should expect to be treated as such
David Raymond Amos
Reply to @Bradley J
Smith Jr: Click on the link I offered above and scroll down to about
page 20 to see proof when Frank McKenna called Harper a lapdog for Bush
during a dog's breakfast with Ralph Goodale in 2004
David Raymond Amos
Reply to @Don Cheer: Look in the link for the newspaper clipping about lapdogs https://www.scribd.com/doc/2718120/integrity-yea-right
POLITICAL DOGMA
Harper's a lapdog for Bush, Martin's a German shepherd,
says former N.B. premier
Canadian Press
To hear former New Brunswick premier Frank McKenna tell it, political debate is going to the dogs.
In Regina, Sask., to help Finance Minister Ralph Goodale win re-election, Mr. McKenna suggested at a rally that opposition leaders offered up a dog's breakfast to voters during the televised leaders debates.
Mr. McKenna described NDP Leader Jack Layton as "an annoying yappy little terrier," Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe as a "French poodle," and Conservative Leader Stephen Harper as "a lapdog for George Bush."
Showing his true dogma, Mr. McKenna had nothing but praise Tuesday for his pet choice. The prime minister, Mr. McKenna said, was "a noble German shepherd standing up for the interests of Canada."
"What does Jack Layton have to lose? He can yap away. No one expects him to win Very much .. . No one attacks aim because he's irrelevant."
https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies
David Raymond Amos @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos @Kathryn98967631 and 49 others
Methinks H.M. Jocelyn should confer with Steve Hatch like I tried to do N'esy Pas?
https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/12/canadians-travelling-to-or-through-us.html
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/day6/benefiting-from-brexit-unboxing-videos-kids-toys-holiday-book-guide-carmen-maria-machado-and-more-1.5394177/in-wake-of-legal-cannabis-u-s-officials-opening-canadian-mail-directed-to-n-b-s-campobello-island-1.5394187
David Raymond Amos @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos @Kathryn98967631 and 49 others
Go figure why this nonsense upset me The bill grants new powers to U.S. border agents working in Canada have the right to bear arms and the discretionary power to detain Canadians for further questioning if the U.S. agent is unhappy with their answers
https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/opinion-border-crossing-rights-1.5382547
Canadians travelling to or through U.S. should pay close attention to their withering rights
Latest changes to Preclearance Agreement give U.S. officials dangerously extended power on Canadian soil
This is a menacing leniency in our era of partisan conflict and rampant xenophobia.
Groups such as the Iranian Canadian Congress have expressed concern
at these new broad powers, perturbed at their potential: "With the rise
of discriminatory instances against Iranians in both Canada and the
United States, and the current political climate between Iran and the
two countries, removing the safeguards for withdrawing allows
preclearance officers the ability to racially profile Iranian-Canadians
with no restrictions or recourse for Iranian-Canadians."
Their worry is understandable, considering the concomitant increases in individual power and instances of racism among U.S. border guards.
It
cannot be left to the whims and biases of individual U.S. officials to
decide what happens to Canadian citizens in Canada. Trump encourages
prejudice and discourages international partnership.
There is a
staggering hypocrisy in building a wall — or a moat full of alligators — at the border to the south, while extending jurisdiction across the border to the north.
Under
Trump's leadership, any latent intolerance among border-protection
agents is given room to roam. For Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to allow
the practices of such an administration to seep over the borderline
onto Canadian soil is to condone the behaviour of Trump's regime.
Worse,
Trudeau's government is empowering foreign officials and disempowering
Canadian citizens. He is kowtowing to American imperialism.
- This column is part of CBC's Opinion section. For more information about this section, please read our FAQ.
About the Author
Thank you
-------------------
Merci d'?crire ? l'honorable Jody Wilson-Raybould, d?put?e de
Vancouver Granville.
Le pr?sent message vise ? vous informer que nous avons re?u votre
courriel. En raison d'une augmentation importante du volume de
correspondance, il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de
votre courriel. Sachez que votre message sera examin? attentivement.
Pour nous aider ? r?pondre ? vos pr?occupations plus rapidement,
veuillez inclure dans le corps de votre courriel votre nom complet,
votre adresse et votre code postal.
Veuillez prendre note que votre message sera transmis au minist?re de
la Justice s'il porte sur des sujets qui rel?vent du r?le de la
d?put?e en tant que ministre de la Justice et procureure g?n?rale du
Canada. Pour toute correspondance future adress?e ? la ministre de la
Justice, veuillez ?crire directement au minist?re de la Justice ?
mcu@justice.gc.ca ou appelez au 613-957-4222.
Merci
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Barry, Clare" <Clare.Barry@justice.gc.ca>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 17:37:23 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Facing a divided province, a non-profit
strives for 'social cohesion' in New Brunswick ??? YEA RIGHT
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Je serai absente du bureau entre le 27 decembre et le 2 janvier. Dans
mon absence, veuillez contactez Sam Boorman ou Melissa Chan dans le
bureau regional.
I will be away from the office from December 27, 2018 to January 2,
2019. In my absence, kindly contact Sam Boorman or Melissa Chan of the
Atlantic Regional Office.
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Jensen, Jan" <jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 17:37:23 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Facing a divided province, a non-profit
strives for 'social cohesion' in New Brunswick ??? YEA RIGHT
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I will be away from the office and not returning until Tuesday
December 27th, 2018. If you require immediate assistance, please
contact my assistant at (902) 407 7461.
---------- Original message ----------
From: Bill.Blair@parl.gc.ca
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 17:37:57 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Facing a divided province, a non-profit
strives for 'social cohesion' in New Brunswick ??? YEA RIGHT
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
Please be advised that the Constituency Office of Bill Blair will be
closed from December 24th to January 1st. The office will re-open on
January 2nd, 2019. During this time I will have limited access to
email.
Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays and all the best for 2019.
Sincerely,
Jessica Bozzo
---------- Original message ----------
From: Justice Minister <JUSTMIN@novascotia.ca>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2018 17:37:27 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Facing a divided province, a non-profit
strives for 'social cohesion' in New Brunswick ??? YEA RIGHT
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank you for your email to the Minister of Justice. Please be assured
that it has been received by the Department. Your email will be
reviewed and addressed accordingly. Thank you.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 22:02:31 -0400
Subject: YO Brenda Lucki You know as well as I that the Civilian
Review and Complaints Commission has not done anything ethical since
we crossed paths in 2003 and obviously never will
To: daniel.gosselin@cas-satj.gc.ca
Bruce.Preston@cas-satj.gc.ca, Beatriz.Winter@cas-satj.gc.ca,
Gib.vanErt@scc-csc.ca, marc.giroux@fja-cmf.gc.ca,
Lorri.Warner@justice.gc.ca, jan.jensen@justice.gc.ca,
bill.pentney@justice.gc.ca, Nathalie.Drouin@justice.gc.ca,
Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
Clare.Barry@justice.gc.ca, David.Hansen@justice.gc.ca,
Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, liliana.longo@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca, Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca,
Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, pm@pm.gc.ca, andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca,
maxime.bernier@parl.gc.ca, "Michael.Wernick"
<Michael.Wernick@pco-bcp.gc.ca
<Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, "Gilles.Blinn"
<Gilles.Blinn@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Larry.Tremblay"
<Larry.Tremblay@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
<Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, washington field
<washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, "Boston.Mail" <Boston.Mail@ic.fbi.gov>
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, "David.Raymond.Amos"
<David.Raymond.Amos@gmail.com>
- Hide quoted text -
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Complaints <complaints@crcc-ccetp.gc.ca>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2018 17:56:32 +0000
Subject: Civilian Review and Complaints Commission 2018-2861 David Amos
To: "david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
David Amos:
Please see the attached letter regarding your complaint against the RCMP.
Intake Office, Operations
Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the RCMP / Government of Canada
complaints@crcc-ccetp.gc.ca<
1-800-665-6878 / TTY: 1-866-432-5827/
www.crcc-ccetp.gc.ca/en/make-
Bureau de réception des plaintes, Opérations
Commission civile d'examen et de traitement des plaintes relatives à
la GRC / Gouvernement du Canada
plaintes@crcc-ccetp.gc.ca<
1-800-665-6878 / ATS : 1-866-432-5827/
www.crcc-ccetp.gc.ca/fr/depot-
[crcc-email-block]
http://davidamos.blogspot.com/
"Harper, Stephen - M.P." Harper.S@parl.gc.ca wrote:
Subject: RE: Re: Lets all go through the looking glass to check the
Integrity of the Talking Heads in BC tonight
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 15:32:54 -0500
From: "Harper, Stephen - M.P." Harper.S@parl.gc.ca
To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
Thank you for your e-mail message to Stephen Harper, Leader of the
Opposition. Your views and suggestions are important to us. Once they
have been carefully considered, you may receive a further reply.
*Remember to include your mailing address if you would like a response.
If you prefer to send your thoughts by regular mail, please address them to:
Stephen Harper, M.P.
Leader of the Opposition
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6
Mail may be sent postage free to any Member of Parliament.
You can also reach Mr. Harper by fax at: (613) 947-0310
Martin Demands That Harper Must Come Clean on Notwithstanding Clause
by LPC Friday, 16 December 2005
Prime Minister Paul Martin demanded Conservative Leader Stephen Harper
come clean that he intends to use the notwithstanding clause to
overturn the Charter right to same-sex marriage.
Mr. Harper said during tonight’s leader’s debate in Vancouver on the
topic of abolishing same-sex marriage: "I will never use the
notwithstanding clause on that issue."
Prime Minister Martin asked that he be honest with the Canadian people
regarding his intention to override a Charter right.
"We're talking about integrity. That means being honest. Either Mr.
Harper is going to try to change the law of the country that protects
the rights and freedoms of gays and lesbians or he's not going to,"
said Prime Minister Martin.
"If he's going to use the notwithstanding clause, he should say so,
and the people will at least know what his position is."
The Prime Minister said Mr. Harper’s proposal would require the use of
the notwithstanding clause because it is not possible to have a vote
in the house that will overrule the Constitution and the courts
without using the notwithstanding clause.
This is borne out by a January 25 open letter from more than 100 legal
experts from across Canada to Mr. Harper regarding same-sex marriage
legislation.
Mr. Martin called on Mr. Harper to be "honest."
He made clear that the Liberal government does not believe that you
can pick and choose which Charter rights you will protect and he
affirmed that he will respect the Charter as a whole.
The Prime Minister said Mr. Harper’s proposal would require the use of
the notwithstanding clause because it is not possible to have a vote
in the house that will overrule the Constitution and the courts
without using the notwithstanding clause.
This is borne out by a January 25 open letter from more than 100 legal
experts from across Canada to Mr. Harper regarding same-sex marriage
legislation.
Mr. Martin called on Mr. Harper to be "honest."
He made clear that the Liberal government does not believe that you
can pick and choose which Charter rights you will protect and he
affirmed that he will respect the Charter as a whole.
On 12/12/18, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
> https://davidraymondamos3.
>
> Wednesday, 12 December 2018
>
> The latest Public Safety Minister Carl Urquhart yesterday the RCMP and
> many lawyers know Fat Fred City and the province are about to get sued
> BIGTIME
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Gallant, Brian (LEG)" <Brian.Gallant@gnb.ca>
> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 17:48:50 +0000
> Subject: RE: YO Deputy Premier Robert Gauvin Enjoy
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Thank you for writing to the Leader of the Official Opposition of New
> Brunswick. Please be assured that your e-mail will be reviewed.
>
> If this is a media request, please forward your e-mail to
> ashley.beaudin@gnb.ca
>
> ---
>
> Nous vous remercions d’avoir communiqué avec le chef de l’opposition
> officielle du Nouveau-Brunswick. Soyez assuré(e) que votre courriel
> sera examiné.
>
> Si ceci est une demande médiatique, prière de la transmettre à
> ashley.beaudin@gnb.ca
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: Premier of Ontario | Premier ministre de l’Ontario
> <Premier@ontario.ca>
> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 17:48:28 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: YO Deputy Premier Robert Gauvin Enjoy
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Thank you for your email. Your thoughts, comments and input are greatly
> valued.
>
> You can be assured that all emails and letters are carefully read,
> reviewed and taken into consideration.
>
> There may be occasions when, given the issues you have raised and the
> need to address them effectively, we will forward a copy of your
> correspondence to the appropriate government official. Accordingly, a
> response may take several business days.
>
> Thanks again for your email.
> ______
>
> Merci pour votre courriel. Nous vous sommes très reconnaissants de
> nous avoir fait part de vos idées, commentaires et observations.
>
> Nous tenons à vous assurer que nous lisons attentivement et prenons en
> considération tous les courriels et lettres que nous recevons.
>
> Dans certains cas, nous transmettrons votre message au ministère
> responsable afin que les questions soulevées puissent être traitées de
> la manière la plus efficace possible. En conséquence, plusieurs jours
> ouvrables pourraient s’écouler avant que nous puissions vous répondre.
>
> Merci encore pour votre courriel.
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Gauvin, Serge (SNB)" <Serge.Gauvin@snb.ca>
> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 17:48:49 +0000
> Subject: Réponse automatique : YO Deputy Premier Robert Gauvin Enjoy
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> I am out of the office. Please contact Patrick Windle at
> patrick.windle@snb.ca
>
> Je suis absent du bureau. Veuillez contacter Patrick Windle à
> patrick.windle@snb.ca
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Cormier, Donna (JAG/JPG)" <donna.cormier@gnb.ca>
> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 20:15:11 +0000
> Subject: Automatic reply: Yp John Logan I just called
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> I'm away from the office until December 12, 2018. Should your matter
> require immediate attention, please contact Susan Butler at (506)
> 453-6309.
>
> Je suis à l'extérieur du bureau jusqu'au 12 décembre 2018. Si votre
> matière est urgente, veuillez communiquer avec Susan Butler au (506)
> 453-6309.
>
> Merci / Thank you
> Donna Cormier
>
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 15:49:18 -0400
> Subject: Yp John Logan I just called
> To: donna.cormier@gnb.ca, John.Logan@gnb.ca
> Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
> Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2018 02:04:52 -0400
> Subject: So Much for the Strong Ethics of the Strong Organization
> commonnly knows as the RCMP/GRC N'esy Pas?
> To: Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, "Jody.Wilson-Raybould"
> <Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
> <mike.holland@gnb.ca>, "Mitton, Megan (LEG)" <megan.mitton@gnb.ca>,
> "carl.urquhart" <carl.urquhart@gnb.ca>, "Stephane.vaillancourt"
> <Stephane.vaillancourt@rcmp-
> <steve.murphy@ctv.ca>, news <news@kingscorecord.com>, "Gilles.Blinn"
> <Gilles.Blinn@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "Michelle.Boutin"
> <Michelle.Boutin@rcmp-grc.gc.
> <michelle.conroy@gnb.ca>, "michael.comeau" <michael.comeau@gnb.ca>,
> "Norman.Sabourin" <Norman.Sabourin@cjc-ccm.gc.ca
> <andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca>, "maxime.bernier"
> <maxime.bernier@parl.gc.ca>, "Gilles.Moreau"
> <Gilles.Moreau@forces.gc.ca>, "Gilles.Cote" <Gilles.Cote@gnb.ca>,
> "gerry.lowe" <gerry.lowe@gnb.ca>, "Gerald.Butts"
> <Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>, "Michael.Wernick"
> <Michael.Wernick@pco-bcp.gc.ca
> <Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "dale.drummond"
> <dale.drummond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
> ddale <ddale@thestar.ca>, sfine <sfine@globeandmail.com>
> Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: ethics-ethique ethics-ethique <ethics-ethique@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
> Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2018 00:22:30 -0500
> Subject: Re: Re My many calls to the Calgary Police Dept about their
> client Partick Doran and his many cohorts
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> This will confirm that we have received your enquiry and it has been
> placed in a priority sequence.
> ******************************
> La présente confirme que nous avons bien reçu votre requête et qu'elle
> a été placée en ordre de priorité de réception.
>
> Thank you/Merci
>
> Professional Ethics Office / Bureau de l'éthique professionelle
> Royal Canadian Mounted Police / Gendarmerie royale du Canada
> 73 Leikin Dr., M5-3-101
> RCMP Mailstop #58/
> GRC Arrêt Postal #58
> Ottawa, Ontario
> K1A 0R2
>
> 1-866-206-0195 (off/bur)
>
> ethics-ethique@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>
> "Strong Ethics, Strong Organization"
> « Une éthique solide pour une organisation solide »
>
> This document is the property of the Government of Canada. It is
> loaned, in confidence, to your agency only and is not to be
> reclassified or further disseminated without the consent of the
> originator."
>
> « Ce document appartient au gouvernement du Canada. Il n'est transmis
> en confidence qu'à votre organisme et il ne doit pas être reclassifié
> ou transmis à d'autres sans le consentement de l'expéditeur. »
>
>
>
>
>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com
>> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:32:09 -0400
>> Subject: Attn Integrity Commissioner Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>> To: coi@gnb.ca
>> Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>
>> Good Day Sir
>>
>> After I heard you speak on CBC I called your office again and managed
>> to speak to one of your staff for the first time
>>
>> Please find attached the documents I promised to send to the lady who
>> answered the phone this morning. Please notice that not after the Sgt
>> at Arms took the documents destined to your office his pal Tanker
>> Malley barred me in writing with an "English" only document.
>>
>> These are the hearings and the dockets in Federal Court that I
>> suggested that you study closely.
>>
>> This is the docket in Federal Court
>>
>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>>
>> These are digital recordings of the last three hearings
>>
>> Dec 14th https://archive.org/details/
>>
>> January 11th, 2016 https://archive.org/details/
>>
>> April 3rd, 2017
>>
>> https://archive.org/details/
>>
>>
>> This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal
>>
>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.
>>
>>
>> The only hearing thus far
>>
>> May 24th, 2017
>>
>> https://archive.org/details/
>>
>>
>> This Judge understnds the meaning of the word Integrity
>>
>> Date: 20151223
>>
>> Docket: T-1557-15
>>
>> Fredericton, New Brunswick, December 23, 2015
>>
>> PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Bell
>>
>> BETWEEN:
>>
>> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
>>
>> Plaintiff
>>
>> and
>>
>> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
>>
>> Defendant
>>
>> ORDER
>>
>> (Delivered orally from the Bench in Fredericton, New Brunswick, on
>> December 14, 2015)
>>
>> The Plaintiff seeks an appeal de novo, by way of motion pursuant to
>> the Federal Courts Rules (SOR/98-106), from an Order made on November
>> 12, 2015, in which Prothonotary Morneau struck the Statement of Claim
>> in its entirety.
>>
>> At the outset of the hearing, the Plaintiff brought to my attention a
>> letter dated September 10, 2004, which he sent to me, in my then
>> capacity as Past President of the New Brunswick Branch of the Canadian
>> Bar Association, and the then President of the Branch, Kathleen Quigg,
>> (now a Justice of the New Brunswick Court of Appeal). In that letter
>> he stated:
>>
>> As for your past President, Mr. Bell, may I suggest that you check the
>> work of Frank McKenna before I sue your entire law firm including you.
>> You are your brother’s keeper.
>>
>> Frank McKenna is the former Premier of New Brunswick and a former
>> colleague of mine at the law firm of McInnes Cooper. In addition to
>> expressing an intention to sue me, the Plaintiff refers to a number of
>> people in his Motion Record who he appears to contend may be witnesses
>> or potential parties to be added. Those individuals who are known to
>> me personally, include, but are not limited to the former Prime
>> Minister of Canada, The Right Honourable Stephen Harper; former
>> Attorney General of Canada and now a Justice of the Manitoba Court of
>> Queen’s Bench, Vic Toews; former member of Parliament Rob Moore;
>> former Director of Policing Services, the late Grant Garneau; former
>> Chief of the Fredericton Police Force, Barry McKnight; former Staff
>> Sergeant Danny Copp; my former colleagues on the New Brunswick Court
>> of Appeal, Justices Bradley V. Green and Kathleen Quigg, and, retired
>> Assistant Commissioner Wayne Lang of the Royal Canadian Mounted
>> Police.
>>
>> In the circumstances, given the threat in 2004 to sue me in my
>> personal capacity and my past and present relationship with many
>> potential witnesses and/or potential parties to the litigation, I am
>> of the view there would be a reasonable apprehension of bias should I
>> hear this motion. See Justice de Grandpré’s dissenting judgment in
>> Committee for Justice and Liberty et al v National Energy Board et al,
>> [1978] 1 SCR 369 at p 394 for the applicable test regarding
>> allegations of bias. In the circumstances, although neither party has
>> requested I recuse myself, I consider it appropriate that I do so.
>>
>>
>> AS A RESULT OF MY RECUSAL, THIS COURT ORDERS that the Administrator of
>> the Court schedule another date for the hearing of the motion. There
>> is no order as to costs.
>>
>> “B. Richard Bell”
>> Judge
>>
>>
>> Below after the CBC article about your concerns (I made one comment
>> already) you will find the text of just two of many emails I had sent
>> to your office over the years since I first visited it in 2006.
>>
>> I noticed that on July 30, 2009, he was appointed to the the Court
>> Martial Appeal Court of Canada Perhaps you should scroll to the
>> bottom of this email ASAP and read the entire Paragraph 83 of my
>> lawsuit now before the Federal Court of Canada?
>>
>> "FYI This is the text of the lawsuit that should interest Trudeau the
>> most
>>
>>
>> ---------- Original message ----------
>> From: justin.trudeau.a1@parl.gc.ca
>> Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:18 PM
>> Subject: Réponse automatique : RE My complaint against the CROWN in
>> Federal Court Attn David Hansen and Peter MacKay If you planning to
>> submit a motion for a publication ban on my complaint trust that you
>> dudes are way past too late
>> To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com
>>
>> Veuillez noter que j'ai changé de courriel. Vous pouvez me rejoindre à
>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>
>> Pour rejoindre le bureau de M. Trudeau veuillez envoyer un courriel à
>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>
>> Please note that I changed email address, you can reach me at
>> lalanthier@hotmail.com
>>
>> To reach the office of Mr. Trudeau please send an email to
>> tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Merci ,
>>
>>
>> http://davidraymondamos3.
>>
>>
>> 83. The Plaintiff states that now that Canada is involved in more war
>> in Iraq again it did not serve Canadian interests and reputation to
>> allow Barry Winters to publish the following words three times over
>> five years after he began his bragging:
>>
>> January 13, 2015
>> This Is Just AS Relevant Now As When I wrote It During The Debate
>>
>> December 8, 2014
>> Why Canada Stood Tall!
>>
>> Friday, October 3, 2014
>> Little David Amos’ “True History Of War” Canadian Airstrikes And
>> Stupid Justin Trudeau
>>
>> Canada’s and Canadians free ride is over. Canada can no longer hide
>> behind Amerka’s and NATO’s skirts.
>>
>> When I was still in Canadian Forces then Prime Minister Jean Chretien
>> actually committed the Canadian Army to deploy in the second campaign
>> in Iraq, the Coalition of the Willing. This was against or contrary to
>> the wisdom or advice of those of us Canadian officers that were
>> involved in the initial planning phases of that operation. There were
>> significant concern in our planning cell, and NDHQ about of the dearth
>> of concern for operational guidance, direction, and forces for
>> operations after the initial occupation of Iraq. At the “last minute”
>> Prime Minister Chretien and the Liberal government changed its mind.
>> The Canadian government told our amerkan cousins that we would not
>> deploy combat troops for the Iraq campaign, but would deploy a
>> Canadian Battle Group to Afghanistan, enabling our amerkan cousins to
>> redeploy troops from there to Iraq. The PMO’s thinking that it was
>> less costly to deploy Canadian Forces to Afghanistan than Iraq. But
>> alas no one seems to remind the Liberals of Prime Minister Chretien’s
>> then grossly incorrect assumption. Notwithstanding Jean Chretien’s
>> incompetence and stupidity, the Canadian Army was heroic,
>> professional, punched well above it’s weight, and the PPCLI Battle
>> Group, is credited with “saving Afghanistan” during the Panjway
>> campaign of 2006.
>>
>> What Justin Trudeau and the Liberals don’t tell you now, is that then
>> Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien committed, and deployed the
>> Canadian army to Canada’s longest “war” without the advice, consent,
>> support, or vote of the Canadian Parliament.
>>
>> What David Amos and the rest of the ignorant, uneducated, and babbling
>> chattering classes are too addled to understand is the deployment of
>> less than 75 special operations troops, and what is known by planners
>> as a “six pac cell” of fighter aircraft is NOT the same as a
>> deployment of a Battle Group, nor a “war” make.
>>
>> The Canadian Government or The Crown unlike our amerkan cousins have
>> the “constitutional authority” to commit the Canadian nation to war.
>> That has been recently clearly articulated to the Canadian public by
>> constitutional scholar Phillippe Legasse. What Parliament can do is
>> remove “confidence” in The Crown’s Government in a “vote of
>> non-confidence.” That could not happen to the Chretien Government
>> regarding deployment to Afghanistan, and it won’t happen in this
>> instance with the conservative majority in The Commons regarding a
>> limited Canadian deployment to the Middle East.
>>
>> President George Bush was quite correct after 911 and the terror
>> attacks in New York; that the Taliban “occupied” and “failed state”
>> Afghanistan was the source of logistical support, command and control,
>> and training for the Al Quaeda war of terror against the world. The
>> initial defeat, and removal from control of Afghanistan was vital and
>>
>> P.S. Whereas this CBC article is about your opinion of the actions of
>> the latest Minister Of Health trust that Mr Boudreau and the CBC have
>> had my files for many years and the last thing they are is ethical.
>> Ask his friends Mr Murphy and the RCMP if you don't believe me.
>>
>> Subject:
>> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 12:02:35 -0400
>> From: "Murphy, Michael B. \(DH/MS\)" MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca
>> To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>>
>> January 30, 2007
>>
>> WITHOUT PREJUDICE
>>
>> Mr. David Amos
>>
>> Dear Mr. Amos:
>>
>> This will acknowledge receipt of a copy of your e-mail of December 29,
>> 2006 to Corporal Warren McBeath of the RCMP.
>>
>> Because of the nature of the allegations made in your message, I have
>> taken the measure of forwarding a copy to Assistant Commissioner Steve
>> Graham of the RCMP “J” Division in Fredericton.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Honourable Michael B. Murphy
>> Minister of Health
>>
>> CM/cb
>>
>>
>> Warren McBeath warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca wrote:
>>
>> Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:34:53 -0500
>> From: "Warren McBeath" warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>> To: kilgoursite@ca.inter.net, MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca,
>> nada.sarkis@gnb.ca, wally.stiles@gnb.ca, dwatch@web.net,
>> motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
>> CC: ottawa@chuckstrahl.com, riding@chuckstrahl.com,John.
>> Oda.B@parl.gc.ca,"Bev BUSSON" bev.busson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca,
>> "Paul Dube" PAUL.DUBE@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>> Subject: Re: Remember me Kilgour? Landslide Annie McLellan has
>> forgotten me but the crooks within the RCMP have not
>>
>> Dear Mr. Amos,
>>
>> Thank you for your follow up e-mail to me today. I was on days off
>> over the holidays and returned to work this evening. Rest assured I
>> was not ignoring or procrastinating to respond to your concerns.
>>
>> As your attachment sent today refers from Premier Graham, our position
>> is clear on your dead calf issue: Our forensic labs do not process
>> testing on animals in cases such as yours, they are referred to the
>> Atlantic Veterinary College in Charlottetown who can provide these
>> services. If you do not choose to utilize their expertise in this
>> instance, then that is your decision and nothing more can be done.
>>
>> As for your other concerns regarding the US Government, false
>> imprisonment and Federal Court Dates in the US, etc... it is clear
>> that Federal authorities are aware of your concerns both in Canada
>> the US. These issues do not fall into the purvue of Detachment
>> and policing in Petitcodiac, NB.
>>
>> It was indeed an interesting and informative conversation we had on
>> December 23rd, and I wish you well in all of your future endeavors.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Warren McBeath, Cpl.
>> GRC Caledonia RCMP
>> Traffic Services NCO
>> Ph: (506) 387-2222
>> Fax: (506) 387-4622
>> E-mail warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C.,
>> Office of the Integrity Commissioner
>> Edgecombe House, 736 King Street
>> Fredericton, N.B. CANADA E3B 5H1
>> tel.: 506-457-7890
>> fax: 506-444-5224
>> e-mail:coi@gnb.ca
>>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Justice Website <JUSTWEB@novascotia.ca>
> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 14:21:11 +0000
> Subject: Emails to Department of Justice and Province of Nova Scotia
> To: "motomaniac333@gmail.com" <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Mr. Amos,
> We acknowledge receipt of your recent emails to the Deputy Minister of
> Justice and lawyers within the Legal Services Division of the
> Department of Justice respecting a possible claim against the Province
> of Nova Scotia. Service of any documents respecting a legal claim
> against the Province of Nova Scotia may be served on the Attorney
> General at 1690 Hollis Street, Halifax, NS. Please note that we will
> not be responding to further emails on this matter.
>
> Department of Justice
>
> On 8/3/17, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If want something very serious to download and laugh at as well Please
>> Enjoy and share real wiretap tapes of the mob
>>
>> http://thedavidamosrant.
>> ilian.html
>>
>>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/
>>>
>>> As the CBC etc yap about Yankee wiretaps and whistleblowers I must
>>> ask them the obvious question AIN'T THEY FORGETTING SOMETHING????
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?
>>>
>>> What the hell does the media think my Yankee lawyer served upon the
>>> USDOJ right after I ran for and seat in the 39th Parliament baseball
>>> cards?
>>>
>>> http://archive.org/details/
>>> 6
>>>
>>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/
>>>
>>> http://www.archive.org/
>>>
>>> http://archive.org/details/
>>>
>>> FEDERAL EXPRES February 7, 2006
>>> Senator Arlen Specter
>>> United States Senate
>>> Committee on the Judiciary
>>> 224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
>>> Washington, DC 20510
>>>
>>> Dear Mr. Specter:
>>>
>>> I have been asked to forward the enclosed tapes to you from a man
>>> named, David Amos, a Canadian citizen, in connection with the matters
>>> raised in the attached letter.
>>>
>>> Mr. Amos has represented to me that these are illegal FBI wire tap
>>> tapes.
>>>
>>> I believe Mr. Amos has been in contact with you about this previously.
>>>
>>> Very truly yours,
>>> Barry A. Bachrach
>>> Direct telephone: (508) 926-3403
>>> Direct facsimile: (508) 929-3003
>>> Email: bbachrach@bowditch.com
>>>
>>
>
> http://davidraymondamos3.
>
>
> Sunday, 19 November 2017
> Federal Court of Appeal Finally Makes The BIG Decision And Publishes
> It Now The Crooks Cannot Take Back Ticket To Try Put My Matter Before
> The Supreme Court
>
> https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.
>
>
> Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
>
> Amos v. Canada
> Court (s) Database
>
> Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
> Date
>
> 2017-10-30
> Neutral citation
>
> 2017 FCA 213
> File numbers
>
> A-48-16
> Date: 20171030
>
> Docket: A-48-16
> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
> CORAM:
>
> WEBB J.A.
> NEAR J.A.
> GLEASON J.A.
>
>
> BETWEEN:
> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
> Respondent on the cross-appeal
> (and formally Appellant)
> and
> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
> Appellant on the cross-appeal
> (and formerly Respondent)
> Heard at Fredericton, New Brunswick, on May 24, 2017.
> Judgment delivered at Ottawa, Ontario, on October 30, 2017.
> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:
>
> THE COURT
>
>
>
> Date: 20171030
>
> Docket: A-48-16
> Citation: 2017 FCA 213
> CORAM:
>
> WEBB J.A.
> NEAR J.A.
> GLEASON J.A.
>
>
> BETWEEN:
> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS
> Respondent on the cross-appeal
> (and formally Appellant)
> and
> HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
> Appellant on the cross-appeal
> (and formerly Respondent)
> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY THE COURT
>
> I. Introduction
>
> [1] On September 16, 2015, David Raymond Amos (Mr. Amos)
> filed a 53-page Statement of Claim (the Claim) in Federal Court
> against Her Majesty the Queen (the Crown). Mr. Amos claims $11 million
> in damages and a public apology from the Prime Minister and Provincial
> Premiers for being illegally barred from accessing parliamentary
> properties and seeks a declaration from the Minister of Public Safety
> that the Canadian Government will no longer allow the Royal Canadian
> Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canadian Forces to harass him and his clan
> (Claim at para. 96).
>
> [2] On November 12, 2015 (Docket T-1557-15), by way of a
> motion brought by the Crown, a prothonotary of the Federal Court (the
> Prothonotary) struck the Claim in its entirety, without leave to
> amend, on the basis that it was plain and obvious that the Claim
> disclosed no reasonable claim, the Claim was fundamentally vexatious,
> and the Claim could not be salvaged by way of further amendment (the
> Prothontary’s Order).
>
>
> [3] On January 25, 2016 (2016 FC 93), by way of Mr.
> Amos’ appeal from the Prothonotary’s Order, a judge of the Federal
> Court (the Judge), reviewing the matter de novo, struck all of Mr.
> Amos’ claims for relief with the exception of the claim for damages
> for being barred by the RCMP from the New Brunswick legislature in
> 2004 (the Federal Court Judgment).
>
>
> [4] Mr. Amos appealed and the Crown cross-appealed the
> Federal Court Judgment. Further to the issuance of a Notice of Status
> Review, Mr. Amos’ appeal was dismissed for delay on December 19, 2016.
> As such, the only matter before this Court is the Crown’s
> cross-appeal.
>
>
> II. Preliminary Matter
>
> [5] Mr. Amos, in his memorandum of fact and law in
> relation to the cross-appeal that was filed with this Court on March
> 6, 2017, indicated that several judges of this Court, including two of
> the judges of this panel, had a conflict of interest in this appeal.
> This was the first time that he identified the judges whom he believed
> had a conflict of interest in a document that was filed with this
> Court. In his notice of appeal he had alluded to a conflict with
> several judges but did not name those judges.
>
> [6] Mr. Amos was of the view that he did not have to
> identify the judges in any document filed with this Court because he
> had identified the judges in various documents that had been filed
> with the Federal Court. In his view the Federal Court and the Federal
> Court of Appeal are the same court and therefore any document filed in
> the Federal Court would be filed in this Court. This view is based on
> subsections 5(4) and 5.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985,
> c. F-7:
>
>
> 5(4) Every judge of the Federal Court is, by virtue of his or her
> office, a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal and has all the
> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court of
> Appeal.
> […]
>
> 5(4) Les juges de la Cour fédérale sont d’office juges de la Cour
> d’appel fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que
> les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale.
> […]
> 5.1(4) Every judge of the Federal Court of Appeal is, by virtue of
> that office, a judge of the Federal Court and has all the
> jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal Court.
>
> 5.1(4) Les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale sont d’office juges de la
> Cour fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que les
> juges de la Cour fédérale.
>
>
> [7] However, these subsections only provide that the
> judges of the Federal Court are also judges of this Court (and vice
> versa). It does not mean that there is only one court. If the Federal
> Court and this Court were one Court, there would be no need for this
> section.
> [8] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act provide that:
> 3 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court
> — Appeal Division is continued under the name “Federal Court of
> Appeal” in English and “Cour d’appel fédérale” in French. It is
> continued as an additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and
> for Canada, for the better administration of the laws of Canada and as
> a superior court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
>
> 3 La Section d’appel, aussi appelée la Cour d’appel ou la Cour d’appel
> fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée « Cour d’appel fédérale » en
> français et « Federal Court of Appeal » en anglais. Elle est maintenue
> à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et d’amirauté du
> Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit canadien, et
> continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant compétence en
> matière civile et pénale.
> 4 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal Court
> — Trial Division is continued under the name “Federal Court” in
> English and “Cour fédérale” in French. It is continued as an
> additional court of law, equity and admiralty in and for Canada, for
> the better administration of the laws of Canada and as a superior
> court of record having civil and criminal jurisdiction.
>
> 4 La section de la Cour fédérale du Canada, appelée la Section de
> première instance de la Cour fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée «
> Cour fédérale » en français et « Federal Court » en anglais. Elle est
> maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et
> d’amirauté du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit
> canadien, et continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant
> compétence en matière civile et pénale.
>
>
> [9] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act create
> two separate courts – this Court (section 3) and the Federal Court
> (section 4). If, as Mr. Amos suggests, documents filed in the Federal
> Court were automatically also filed in this Court, then there would no
> need for the parties to prepare and file appeal books as required by
> Rules 343 to 345 of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 in relation
> to any appeal from a decision of the Federal Court. The requirement to
> file an appeal book with this Court in relation to an appeal from a
> decision of the Federal Court makes it clear that the only documents
> that will be before this Court are the documents that are part of that
> appeal book.
>
>
> [10] Therefore, the memorandum of fact and law filed on
> March 6, 2017 is the first document, filed with this Court, in which
> Mr. Amos identified the particular judges that he submits have a
> conflict in any matter related to him.
>
>
> [11] On April 3, 2017, Mr. Amos attempted to bring a motion
> before the Federal Court seeking an order “affirming or denying the
> conflict of interest he has” with a number of judges of the Federal
> Court. A judge of the Federal Court issued a direction noting that if
> Mr. Amos was seeking this order in relation to judges of the Federal
> Court of Appeal, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the Federal Court.
> Mr. Amos raised the Federal Court motion at the hearing of this
> cross-appeal. The Federal Court motion is not a motion before this
> Court and, as such, the submissions filed before the Federal Court
> will not be entertained. As well, since this was a motion brought
> before the Federal Court (and not this Court), any documents filed in
> relation to that motion are not part of the record of this Court.
>
>
> [12] During the hearing of the appeal Mr. Amos alleged that
> the third member of this panel also had a conflict of interest and
> submitted some documents that, in his view, supported his claim of a
> conflict. Mr. Amos, following the hearing of his appeal, was also
> afforded the opportunity to provide a brief summary of the conflict
> that he was alleging and to file additional documents that, in his
> view, supported his allegations. Mr. Amos submitted several pages of
> documents in relation to the alleged conflicts. He organized the
> documents by submitting a copy of the biography of the particular
> judge and then, immediately following that biography, by including
> copies of the documents that, in his view, supported his claim that
> such judge had a conflict.
>
>
> [13] The nature of the alleged conflict of Justice Webb is
> that before he was appointed as a Judge of the Tax Court of Canada in
> 2006, he was a partner with the law firm Patterson Law, and before
> that with Patterson Palmer in Nova Scotia. Mr. Amos submitted that he
> had a number of disputes with Patterson Palmer and Patterson Law and
> therefore Justice Webb has a conflict simply because he was a partner
> of these firms. Mr. Amos is not alleging that Justice Webb was
> personally involved in or had any knowledge of any matter in which Mr.
> Amos was involved with Justice Webb’s former law firm – only that he
> was a member of such firm.
>
>
> [14] During his oral submissions at the hearing of his
> appeal Mr. Amos, in relation to the alleged conflict for Justice Webb,
> focused on dealings between himself and a particular lawyer at
> Patterson Law. However, none of the documents submitted by Mr. Amos at
> the hearing or subsequently related to any dealings with this
> particular lawyer nor is it clear when Mr. Amos was dealing with this
> lawyer. In particular, it is far from clear whether such dealings were
> after the time that Justice Webb was appointed as a Judge of the Tax
> Court of Canada over 10 years ago.
>
>
> [15] The documents that he submitted in relation to the
> alleged conflict for Justice Webb largely relate to dealings between
> Byron Prior and the St. John’s Newfoundland and Labrador office of
> Patterson Palmer, which is not in the same province where Justice Webb
> practiced law. The only document that indicates any dealing between
> Mr. Amos and Patterson Palmer is a copy of an affidavit of Stephen May
> who was a partner in the St. John’s NL office of Patterson Palmer. The
> affidavit is dated January 24, 2005 and refers to a number of e-mails
> that were sent by Mr. Amos to Stephen May. Mr. Amos also included a
> letter that is addressed to four individuals, one of whom is John
> Crosbie who was counsel to the St. John’s NL office of Patterson
> Palmer. The letter is dated September 2, 2004 and is addressed to
> “John Crosbie, c/o Greg G. Byrne, Suite 502, 570 Queen Street,
> Fredericton, NB E3B 5E3”. In this letter Mr. Amos alludes to a
> possible lawsuit against Patterson Palmer.
> [16] Mr. Amos’ position is that simply because Justice Webb
> was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer, he now has a conflict. In Wewaykum
> Indian Band v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2003 SCC 45, [2003] 2 S.C.R.
> 259, the Supreme Court of Canada noted that disqualification of a
> judge is to be determined based on whether there is a reasonable
> apprehension of bias:
> 60 In Canadian law, one standard has now emerged as the
> criterion for disqualification. The criterion, as expressed by de
> Grandpré J. in Committee for Justice and Liberty v. National Energy
> Board, …[[1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716], at p. 394, is the
> reasonable apprehension of bias:
> … the apprehension of bias must be a reasonable one, held by
> reasonable and right minded persons, applying themselves to the
> question and obtaining thereon the required information. In the words
> of the Court of Appeal, that test is "what would an informed person,
> viewing the matter realistically and practically -- and having thought
> the matter through -- conclude. Would he think that it is more likely
> than not that [the decision-maker], whether consciously or
> unconsciously, would not decide fairly."
>
> [17] The issue to be determined is whether an informed
> person, viewing the matter realistically and practically, and having
> thought the matter through, would conclude that Mr. Amos’ allegations
> give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. As this Court has
> previously remarked, “there is a strong presumption that judges will
> administer justice impartially” and this presumption will not be
> rebutted in the absence of “convincing evidence” of bias (Collins v.
> Canada, 2011 FCA 140 at para. 7, [2011] 4 C.T.C. 157 [Collins]. See
> also R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para. 32, 151 D.L.R.
> (4th) 193).
>
> [18] The Ontario Court of Appeal in Rando Drugs Ltd. v.
> Scott, 2007 ONCA 553, 86 O.R. (3d) 653 (leave to appeal to the Supreme
> Court of Canada refused, 32285 (August 1, 2007)), addressed the
> particular issue of whether a judge is disqualified from hearing a
> case simply because he had been a member of a law firm that was
> involved in the litigation that was now before that judge. The Ontario
> Court of Appeal determined that the judge was not disqualified if the
> judge had no involvement with the person or the matter when he was a
> lawyer. The Ontario Court of Appeal also explained that the rules for
> determining whether a judge is disqualified are different from the
> rules to determine whether a lawyer has a conflict:
> 27 Thus, disqualification is not the natural corollary to a
> finding that a trial judge has had some involvement in a case over
> which he or she is now presiding. Where the judge had no involvement,
> as here, it ...
In wake of legal cannabis, U.S. officials opening Canadian mail directed to N.B.'s Campobello Island
'You should have an expectation of privacy with the mail,' says resident Steve Hatch
CBC Radio · Posted: Dec 13, 2019 5:17 PM ET
The International Bridge connects Lubec, Maine, with Campobello Island, N.B. Residents of the idyllic fishing and tourism spot say U.S. border officials have been searching mail deliveries from Canada Post since September. (Don Emmert/AFP/Getty Images)
Residents of Campobello Island, N.B., a picturesque fishing and tourist destination near Maine, say they're worried about how frequently U.S. border officials are searching their domestic parcels delivered by Canada Post.
Since September, nearly "every package that's bound for Campobello is being opened" by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials, according to resident Justin Tinker. The packages arrive wrapped in green tape, which indicates they were unsealed.
It's not the first time this has happened. Cross-border mail was regularly searched after the Sept. 11 attacks, but "the concern this time around is that it's been relatively unprompted and it's become systemic," Tinker told Day 6
Domestic mail meant for residents on the island of nearly 900 is delivered by Canada Post via truck — the only safe option for delivery outside of ferry service that runs seasonally — but has to travel through Maine where a bridge connects Campobello to the U.S. mainland.
U.S. officials have the right to search mail that crosses borders. In a statement to CBC Radio, the federal agency said they "possess broad search authority to ensure the safety and admissibility of all goods entering the United States."
"In my case, it was an Amazon package containing a hat and a glass protector for a phone. Nothing that's going to run afoul of whatever U.S. applicable law," Tinker recalled.
Canada Post confirmed to Day 6 in an email statement that it is working with U.S. border officials to reduce delays.
The International Bridge connects Lubec, Maine, with Campobello Island, N.B. Residents of the idyllic fishing and tourism spot say U.S. border officials have been searching mail deliveries from Canada Post since September. (Don Emmert/AFP/Getty Images)
Residents of Campobello Island, N.B., a picturesque fishing and tourist destination near Maine, say they're worried about how frequently U.S. border officials are searching their domestic parcels delivered by Canada Post.
Since September, nearly "every package that's bound for Campobello is being opened" by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials, according to resident Justin Tinker. The packages arrive wrapped in green tape, which indicates they were unsealed.
It's not the first time this has happened. Cross-border mail was regularly searched after the Sept. 11 attacks, but "the concern this time around is that it's been relatively unprompted and it's become systemic," Tinker told Day 6
Domestic mail meant for residents on the island of nearly 900 is delivered by Canada Post via truck — the only safe option for delivery outside of ferry service that runs seasonally — but has to travel through Maine where a bridge connects Campobello to the U.S. mainland.
U.S. officials have the right to search mail that crosses borders. In a statement to CBC Radio, the federal agency said they "possess broad search authority to ensure the safety and admissibility of all goods entering the United States."
"In my case, it was an Amazon package containing a hat and a glass protector for a phone. Nothing that's going to run afoul of whatever U.S. applicable law," Tinker recalled.
Canada Post confirmed to Day 6 in an email statement that it is working with U.S. border officials to reduce delays.
Cannabis deliveries halted
Some residents chalk up the surge in searches to cannabis legalization in this country."But they [border officials] don't say that," said Steve Hatch, who has launched a formal complaint with Canada Post. "All they say is, 'We have the right to do it.'
As a result of the increased searches, Cannabis NB, the agency that oversees in-store and online cannabis sales in the province, says it has stopped sending marijuana products to Campobello.
Cannabis NB spokesperson Marie-Andrée Bolduc told Day 6 by email that it's "actively looking for solutions to resume service as quickly as possible to Campobello Island."
In the meantime, Hatch worries about how the delivery of cannabis products to residents of Campobello Island could affect them legally, particularly when it comes to cross-border travel.
Canada Post says that delivery by road, via Maine, is the only 'safe option' for getting the mail to Campobello Island. (Darren Calabrese/Canadian Press)
Ferry service to New Brunswick is only available during the summer months, leaving the only entry and exit point through Lubec, Maine.
"If you cannot enter the U.S. from this island, your options are a boat or stay put," Hatch said.
Tinker says it could turn the island into an Alcatraz, referring to the remote prison off the California coast.
Not just cannabis
According to the residents, it's not just packages from online retailers that are getting opened up. Pharmacy shipments to the island, and even inter-library loans from New Brunswick, are being searched.
Canada Post acknowledges that there are challenges with delivering mail through the U.S. but says conversations with U.S. border officials have been productive.
"We believe we've resolved some of their concerns and hope to see fewer delays in the coming weeks," Canada Post spokesperson Jon Hamilton said in the statement.
Steve Hatch has filed a formal complaint about U.S. Customs and Border Protection's searches of domestic mail parcels with Canada Post. (Submitted by Steve Hatch)
But with many fishing boats travelling between the island and New Brunswick, Hatch says he would like the postal service to reconsider delivery by boat.
As a dual citizen to the U.S. and Canada, Hatch hopes to see the situation resolved soon.
"I don't like American bullying. This kind of stuff bothers me," he told Day 6.
"You should have an expectation of privacy with the mail and we don't here on the island."
To hear more from Steve Hatch and Justin Tinker, download our podcast or click Listen above.
464 Comments
David Raymond Amos Canada Post acknowledges that there are challenges with delivering mail through the U.S. but says conversations with U.S. border officials have been productive.
"We believe we've resolved some of their concerns and hope to see fewer delays in the coming weeks," Canada Post spokesperson Jon Hamilton said in the statement.
YEA RIGHT
Methinks the RCMP should well understand why I called Jon Hamilton a dude who used to work for Suncor/Petro-Canada and Premier Mikey Harris before that N'esy Pas?
Jon Hamilton
General Manager, Communications
Canada Post:
Tel: (613) 734 4366
jon.hamilton@canadapost.ca
Michael John
As a Maine resident, I find this outrageous. Where is the Canadian government on this? Surely there is a way to make this work for all parties.
David Raymond Amos
Reply to @Michael John: Dream on
Neil Chow
Come on, it's just mail. They've been listening to your landline and mobile years ago.
David Raymond Amos
Reply to @Neil Chow:
Oh So True No doubt they were listening to Mr Hatch and I because as we
were talking somebody came to his door and he wanted to end the
conversation so I let him go
James Rockford - ( Spaceman )
Reply to @Neil Chow:
Actually, they go through computers that are programmed to respond to certain words or phrases. I used to have a friend .. a mountie ... who worked on the project.
https://techcrunch.com/2015/08/03/uncovering-echelon-the-top-secret-nsa-program-that-has-been-watching-you-your-entire-life/
Neil Chow
Reply to @James
Rockford - ( Spaceman ): That's the main reason they are afraid of
Huawei takes over the 5G network, the US will lose the ability to listen
to you.
David Raymond Amos
Reply to @Neil Chow: Don't bet on it
David Raymond Amos
Trust that I can tell Steve Hatch an interesting story about the Yankee Border Guards in his neighbourhood
David Raymond Amos
Reply to @David Raymond Amos: Well I talked to him but he didn't seem to care about my story
How do you think this will affect Patty Baby Doran in the future ?
ReplyDeleteDO YOU NEED A PERSONAL/BUSINESS/INVESTMENT LOAN? CONTACT US TODAY VIA WhatsApp +19292227023 Email drbenjaminfinance@gmail.com
ReplyDeleteHELLO
Do you find yourself in a bit of trouble with unpaid bills and don’t know which way to go or where to turn? What about finding a reputable Debt Consolidation firm that can assist you in reducing monthly installment so that you will have affordable repayment options as well as room to breathe when it comes to the end of the month and bills need to get paid? Then consider your financial problems over. We Offer LOANS from $3,000.00 Min to $30,000,000.00 Max with a low interest rate of 2% and loan duration of 1 to 35 years to pay back the loan secure and unsecured. Our loans are well insured for maximum security is our priority, Our leading goal is to help you get the services you deserve, Our program is the quickest way to get what you need in a snap.Kindly reduce your payments to ease the strain on your monthly expenses NO MATTER YOUR CREDIT SCORE. GET YOUR INSTANT LOAN APPROVAL 100% GUARANTEED TODAY VIA WhatsApp:+19292227023 Email: drbenjaminfinance@gmail.com