Re: Conservative Party not all Canadians have a short memory
----- Original Message -----
From: David Amos
To: GBFamilyLaw@cs.com
Cc: info@nationalcenterformen.org
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 10:42 AM
Subject: Fw: Guess who is blogging this email right now
----- Original Message -----
From: David Amos
To: grewag1@parl.gc.ca ; grewag@parl.gc.ca
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 4:17 PM
Subject: Fw: Guess who is blogging this email right now
----- Original Message -----
From: David Amos
To: Craig.Chouinard@gnb.ca ; Tim.Porter@gnb.ca ; Governor.Rell@po.state.ct.us ; smay@pattersonpalmer.ca ; johnduggan@legalaid.nf.ca ; brenda.boyd@RCMP-GRC.gc.ca ; McLellan.A@parl.gc.ca ; david@lutz.nb.ca ; cynthia.merlini@dfait-maeci.gc.ca ; ethics@harvard.edu ; INFO7@elections.ca ; inquiry.admin@bellnet.ca ; cotlei@parl.gc.ca ; Robert.Creedon@state.ma.us ; Brian.A.Joyce@state.ma.us ; Jack.Hart@state.ma.us ; Rep.WalterTimilty@hou.state.ma.us ; Rep.AStephenTobin@hou.state.ma.us ; Dianne.Wilkerson@state.ma.us ; Daphne.Thompson@gems2.gov.bc.ca ; coulter.osborne@oico.on.ca ; WayneGreen@mail.gov.nl.ca ; gallanpm@gov.ns.ca ; anrobins@vac-acc.gc.ca ; cei@nbnet.nb.ca ; Brian Mulcahy ; kbar@nbnet.nb.ca
Cc: ethics@ic.gc.ca ; gisele.osborne@gnb.ca ; dayja@sen.parl.gc.ca ; zedp@parl.gc.ca ; rmooremp@nb.sympatico.ca ; savoya2@parl.gc.ca ; thompg@nb.sympatico.ca ; john_kerry@kerry.senate.gov ; martib@sen.parl.gc.ca ; dougchristielaw@shaw.ca ; Mayor@ci.boston.ma.us ; Stephen.Murphy@ci.boston.ma.us ; geline.williams@state.ma.us
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 3:24 PM
Subject: Guess who is blogging this email right now
I am very upset that Dr. Ward Dean, a very important witness of mine against the public corruption was scooped off the street in front of his wife by federal agents who would not say who they were or where or why they were taking her husband away. This happened as he was coming home from an Grand Jury hearing against the IRS in Florida. This was an overt act against his Constitutional Rights and clearly done by those acting under the Patriot Act.
I must ask everyone what of my friend and am I next? I have called many people today in Canada and the USA that I have already received signed answers from. All they do is play dumb or deny or defer me to some other bad acting bastard or worse yet laugh at me. Shame on all of you. You may think you are free but just wait the lawyers may have bastards do it to you someday to protect their mask of virtue. At least none of you can ever say you that didn't know.
Why you failed to do anything to protect your own civil rights is way beyond my simple mind to understand. Do you all think you are above the law and the rights of ordinary people ain't worth a tinkers damn? Well guess ain't being took away without a fight? All the bells and whistles are going off like they did the last time they illegally sent me to jail on October 1st. I am staying far away from anyone and am a threat to no one. If they attack me I will die protecting my freedom from the wrongs of lawyers rather than go to jail or Cuba so they can get rid of me there. If the worst happens I want the world to know that my blood can be found on your hands.
----- Original Message -----
From: David Amos
To: bledrew@uOttawa.ca
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 9:36 AM
Subject: Fw: Small wonder the lady speaking for Bernard Shapiro believed me
----- Original Message -----
From: David Amos
To: news@hilltimes.com
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 10:26 AM
Subject: Fw: Small wonder the lady speaking for Bernard Shapiro believed me
You folks are so full of shit I can't stand it
----- Original Message -----
From: David Amos
To: illuminati_news@comcast.net
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 7:41 PM
Subject: Fw: Small wonder the lady speaking for Bernard Shapiro believed me
----- Original Message -----
From: David Amos
To: ethics@ic.gc.ca ; gisele.osborne@gnb.ca ; dayja@sen.parl.gc.ca ; Pelletier, Raymond F. ; zedp@parl.gc.ca ; rmooremp@nb.sympatico.ca ; savoya2@parl.gc.ca ; thompg@nb.sympatico.ca ; john_kerry@kerry.senate.gov ; martib@sen.parl.gc.ca ; dougchristielaw@shaw.ca ; Mayor@ci.boston.ma.us ; Stephen.Murphy@ci.boston.ma.us ; geline.williams@state.ma.us ; Brian Mulcahy ; madanr@ojp.usdoj.gov ; strategis@ic.gc.ca ; wilson.howie@ic.gc.ca ; cbisson@mccarthy.ca ; lynn.morrison@oico.on.ca
Cc: Governor Office ; Governor.Rell@po.state.ct.us ; smay@pattersonpalmer.ca ; johnduggan@legalaid.nf.ca ; brenda.boyd@RCMP-GRC.gc.ca ; McLellan.A@parl.gc.ca ; david@lutz.nb.ca ; cynthia.merlini@dfait-maeci.gc.ca ; ethics@harvard.edu ; INFO7@elections.ca ; inquiry.admin@bellnet.ca ; cotlei@parl.gc.ca ; Robert.Creedon@state.ma.us ; Brian.A.Joyce@state.ma.us ; Jack.Hart@state.ma.us ; Rep.WalterTimilty@hou.state.ma.us ; Rep.AStephenTobin@hou.state.ma.us ; Dianne.Wilkerson@state.ma.us ; Daphne.Thompson@gems2.gov.bc.ca ; coulter.osborne@oico.on.ca ; WayneGreen@mail.gov.nl.ca ; gallanpm@gov.ns.ca ; anrobins@vac-acc.gc.ca ; cei@nbnet.nb.ca ; kbar@nbnet.nb.ca ; Byron Prior
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 12:52 PM
Subject: Small wonder the lady speaking for Bernard Shapiro believed me
. Senator Joe Day should have given him my material a long long time ago. I thought Howie Wilson still had the job because everything was kinda murky within Strategis at the time and nobody would respond to me. Since my affairs in the USA are beginning to develop in a positive direction, now Joe Day and the others are just starting to pretend that they are ethical? Not on my watch. I have yet to find out who the hell the Ethics Counselor is for the Senate but rest assured I will find out and forward him all that I will send to you. Good luck with your conscience folks. Perhaps someone should call me soon. 506 434-1379
Friday the 13th of August, 2004
Senator Joseph A. Day Ethics Counselor, Howard Wilson
14 Everett St. 66 Slater St., 22nd Floor
Hampton, NB Ottawa, ON. K1A 0C9
Prime Minister, Paul Martin Geoff Reagan c/o Irwin Cotler,
80 Wellington Street 900 Justice Building
Ottawa, ON. K1A 0A2 Ottawa, ON. K1A 0A6
Eva Plunkett Inspector General (CSIS) Philippe Rabot
340 Laurier Avenue West RCMP External Review Committee
Ottawa, ON. K1A 0P8 P.O. Box 1159, Station B
Ottawa, ON. K1P 5R2
RE: Corruption
Hey Joe,
The fact that you said I was not worth voting for is no matter to me. I just wish my fellow Canadians had the right to vote you out of your job. That is one thing I agree with Mr. Lord about. To me you are just another lawyer who couldn’t get elected so you were politically appointed to a high government position for the benefit of Irving interests. Now that you are in public service not only must you obey the Code of Conduct of your chosen profession, you must act ethically as a well paid federal employee and speak for the public good. Forget your former employer’s interests and do your job.
It is time to check the work of many high officials and mine as well. I demand that you study of the enclosed material then forward it all to the Prime Minister Paul Martin. Ask him to forward copies of it all to the other above named government employees and to the Arar Commission in particular. I can easily prove prior contact to all the above named persons or their offices and I believe they should be expecting to see this stuff. The CD of the copy of wiretap tape numbered 139 is served upon you as an officer of the court in confidence in order that it may be properly investigated. I have given you many more documents than the ones I will mention in the following paragraphs. I will send a copy of this letter to many people as a double check on your ethics.
One of the documents of foremost importance to me is a recent letter Attorney General Brad Green sent to me dated August 3rd. It is attached to the letter and all the other material I had delivered to Bernard Lord and Frank McKenna just after Canada Day. I deem the aforesaid letter to be so important because he is the first Canadian public servant in any office to even admit knowledge my concerns and allegations in two months of waiting for a proper response. His position in public service and his answer forever prove just how bad things really are in Canada and the USA. I am not sorry for the delay in providing you with this material as I planned and stated within the enclosed email. If you had wanted it, you would have returned my calls or answered my email.
I had spoken to many people about my concerns as I ran for Parliament. I made certain that the proper authorities knew of my allegations the instant I was on Canadian soil. If our government was on the up and up, someone should have sent the cops around to pick this stuff up or at least ask me a few questions a long time ago. I cannot wait any longer for my country to act properly in my defense. The Yankees now want me in court.
The recent letter from Brad Green and the actions of some other bad actors in Fredericton and the USA gave me cause to pause, rethink and rewrite a bunch of stuff. One would think that Henrick Tonning, the first judge that Green had ever appointed or the unnamed duty counsel in court on the first day of Brad’s new plan to defend the rights of the people would have informed him that I was very pissed off and still in New Brunswick. The Sheriff who refused to identify himself in Henrik’s court that day was more than willing to take me away and under his jurisdiction. What province writes the Sheriff’s paycheck? Even the local rumormill had enough time to generate enough gossip from July 29th to August 3rd for Brad Green to be adequately informed before he wrote such a ridiculous letter to me. Clearly Brad paid no heed my fair warning to lawyers about making one false move. Maybe he should call the former Attorney General in New Hampshire and ask Peter Heed why he paid no heed to me. Now I will prove to both Mr Heed and Brad Green that I wasn’t joking and that I am well within the jurisdiction of law enforcement in both New Brunswick and New Hampshire.
If the Fredericton City Police arrest me as I approach the legislature one day very soon, Brad Green, Bruce Noble and I will have lots to argue about in years to come in many courts. I will be filing a complaint against them and several others with the Law Society anyway. I am looking to hire an ethical lawyer to sue the bastards long before the Law Society gets around to figuring out how to ignore my allegations. What would you do if you were I? Do you know an ethical lawyer that I can discuss this with? Or would I fare better if I acted ethically in a Pro Se fashion?
My encounter with the Ombudsman, Bernard Richard proved much to me about NB politicians. I didn’t believe what he said about Wayne Steeves the second he mentioned Connie Fogal. He tried so hard to argue about jurisdiction that he maintained Rule One of the Code of Professional Conduct of the New Brunswick Law Society is not about integrity but jurisdiction. No lawyer is that dumb and the last thing I would want is such a man to speak for me. So I promptly told him I would see him in court and ended our conversation. He was obviously arguing against me for the benefit of Brad Green rather than making a sincere and ethical effort to listen to me and address my concerns to the powers that be on my behalf. Richard likely has few Liberal friends to chum with. For all I know he may have just got back from Larry’s Gulch so I allowed him to continue on the fishing expedition byway of email. For his information just in case he is that dumb, I brought up the subject of integrity so he would stop arguing jurisdiction and act more ethically and diligently as a lawyer. When he continued, I quit talking and sought proof of contact. Lawyers must maintain their integrity no matter the jurisdiction or issue.
I can easily refute the jurisdictional argument of both Mr. Richard and Brad Green. I am used to that legal dodge. Thirty-three years ago a RCMP officer charged me with speeding by within the city limits of Fredericton. When I questioned his jurisdiction the Crown was quick to inform me that the RCMP have jurisdiction over everyone everywhere in Canada. If I were to unbuckle my seat belt in defiance of a NB law as I drove to Hampton to serve this material upon a lawyer employed as a Senator in the federal government, in what court would I appear? What if I served this material upon the cop that had the authority stop me? If the matter was heard in Hampton or Sussex Provincial Court shouldn’t Judge Henrik Tonning immediately recuse himself because of his words to me in court on July 29th. Would I not have the right to make a federal case out of what began as a seat belt offense and change the jurisdiction to the USA?
A far better example is what happened on June 24th. A man who claimed represent the Crown as the Sergeant at Arms in the New Brunswick legislature claimed that he and the Fredericton PD had jurisdiction over me and the right to throw me out of the public building. However when I tried to give them this stuff as the Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan and Attorney General Brad Green have both suggested, they refused. What right did they have to do so? Should I file a complaint against the Crown in the USA? I was thrown out of a building in NB. Who defends the Crown if not Green?
Senator Day, make certain that Jack Hooper of CSIS sends someone to see the priest, Bill Elliott and get the stuff I gave to him the night of his debate on June 21st. Everybody in the churchyard watched that old man holler at me as I gave it to him. Now Mr. Waldman can listen to what Mr. Harper was harping about on June 22nd on the CBC, As I told the priest there were three original wiretap tapes within that envelope I gave him. The tapes are important evidence for the Arar Commission. If nothing else their mere existence proves how far the FEDS in two countries will go to cover things up. Let me know if the priest denies he got them or Hooper won’t give them up, I have several more hidden in Canada that the Arar Commission can have. Hooper can hoop and holler about National Security all he wants. I must protect my ass if he won’t, If you look at the photo I have provided, you will see me talking to a RCMP officer that was guarding Harper in Sussex on June 19th. Now you know what I was talking about to him. What I want to know is that cop’s name. Harper wasn’t long spilling the beans to his political advantage on CBC but his lawyers weren’t long shutting him up on June 24th after Waldman demanded that he testify at the Inquiry. Why is that?
Waldman should have known of me if Arar’s lawyers at CCR in the USA had kept him properly informed. Rest assured that I did as soon as I became aware of him. During our conversation I know I said enough for him to check my words. His silence spoke volumes.
Mr. Arar’s lawyers had no fear of filing a complaint against Ashcroft and the others in the USA after they received my stuff last November. I see no further progress with that suit since it was filed last January. Why have they ignored me? Did they make a deal and settle? Why have they fallen so silent within the inquiry in Canada?
If you don’t believe me about what Mr. Harper knows, call Arthur Hamilton and ask him about the little talk we had about this a little while ago. Mr. Hamilton can never say he doesn’t know because I saved his voicemail to me. I have no doubt that he has had a long talk with our new MP Rob Moore by now. Why are they so silent?
I have many questions to ask Geoff Regan and Anne McLellan about the Arar Commission. Geoff has no time to return my call but lots of time to golf with Clinton and McKenna. I demand to know if the many documents that caused the delay in the inquiry were mine. If not, why not? I did do as Anne McLellan suggested and gave this stuff to both Customs and Immigration the instant I landed in Canadian jurisdiction. If I am not called to testify, I will never understand. I did manage to talk to Veena Verma and she had no answers for me only arguments about jurisdiction as usual.
Your friend, Mr. Zed can never say he don’t know because as you can see I served his law office this stuff on June 25th the day before he and John Herron greeted Paul Martin at the airport. After your review of this stuff you must confess it is obvious to all why Paul Zed and his friend Frank McKenna have been struck so dumb. Paul Zed was elected to speak for that politically minded priest amongst others, correct? Perhaps after they voted according to their conscience they should act according to it as well.
I know that I have proved what everybody knows. The word of a lawyer is worthless. Peter MacKay also proved that to all the true Progressive Conservatives in Canada. The fact that another lawyer, John Crosbie advised the former Alliance party on what to say is too funny and sad for the words of this letter. One reason I came home and ran for Parliament is to sooth my own soul because I found Mr. Harper and his buddies to be a truly dangerous bunch of characters. Crosbie did too for awhile anyway. Ain’t it funny how he now sings a different tune? There is no doubt that the old lawyer Paul Martin is a monumental a crook. The boat in Sidney proved that to me two days after the election. He can play well within Mulroney’s league. It was truly sad that so many Canadians were compelled to vote for Martin simply because they were too scared that Harper may lead our country down a garden path and under an evil Bush.
Perhaps the NDP should check my work closely and then help me expose all the crooks in both the Liberal and Conservative camps. I will give this stuff to their local lawyer leader Ms. Weir. Maybe it is time for the NDP to shine for the benefit of all Canadians. Even though the NDP have only 19 seats in Parliament I believe they have the power to inspire a non-confidence vote and cause another election. I think the NDP politicians should think about the following statement a long time then review how they made out in the last election. I did say at the Moss Glen debate that the NDP party was the best spot to place a vote. However NDP people I know argued with me saying that if they did that their vote would be wasted and Harper might get in, so they must vote out of fear for a Liberal. Therefore I fall back on what I had said during the Hampton debate in that every ballot should have one more line on it "None of the above" then I am certain many more Canadians would exercise their right to vote. Many did agree.
Senator Day I did come across your wife in the Canada Elections office as she worked in support of Herron. Please don’t deny the fact that the person seated beside your wife in Hampton laughed and applauded at many of my remarks, Everybody heard what I said to Herron in front of Rob Moore about suing him. Herron is foolish if he thought I was kidding. Herron is a layman with few political friends. I spoke to him very openly and honestly after the debate in Moss Glen. It should be interesting to see whom he and Rob Moore manage to hire for lawyers to defend them from my actions. I look forward to meeting a judge but I am not certain I would be allowed a jury of my peers. Lawyers do have an unfair stranglehold on Canadian justice. As you check my work, you should see that I am out to shame all lawyers and the political ones in particular. None of this would have been necessary if just one lawyer had upheld their oath or one public servant had blown the whistle. Why is not the question. The answer is Filthy Lucre.
Today is Friday the 13th. I am expected to stand in court in Boston and argue allegations of criminal harassment made against me by a lawyer who has practiced crimes against me. Clearly I am not making an appearance. My kids and I will remain in this jurisdiction. I suspect foul play and that it is a ploy to make me return to the USA. I have little doubt that agents of the DHS would never allow me to appear in that court. I notified everyone down in Boston that I look forward to trial. Monday will tell the tale.
In closing I must say I considered myself a raging success to finally break surface in the media and in an Irving owned newspaper of all places. A former Irving lawyer needs no explanation as to the reason for my joy. That said, let’s see if I can make the Internet work for me in a grassroots sort of way. The Irvings are a little behind the times in that regard. Although I do not wear a blue coat, I did give the folks in Fundy one last chance to vote for a PC (Pissed off Candidate) and I tried to do it in a fun fashion so that my efforts would be remembered. Read the Kings County Record again to check my words. As I watch the boob tube, I find the most honest reporting of the political circus in America can be found on the Canadian comedy shows. The stuff on Barack Obama, Ralph Nader, Melanie Sloan and the Clintons should be pretty funny to you as well as you read the documents I have provided. Now all I can say is Hooray for Canada and thanks to the folks in Fundy that did vote for me. I am glad that at least one percent understood and agreed with me. Quite likely not one of them was a lawyer. Now I only need one lawyer in the right place in government to do the right thing and things will change for the better. Until that happens I will continue torturing lawyers with dilemmas that a simple application of ethics could easily solve. It is just a matter of time before one will break rank with the crooks and become a truly honourable hero for the common man. As I said in my first political speech I am a son of the Keith Clan whose roots can be found in Fundy. Although I have separated myself from that Clan and founded my own in order to declare a Blood Feud in my own name, I will always honour from whence I came. I simply don’t care what lawyers or politicians think of me Although I have no religion, I have faith in my forefather’s motto "Veritas Vincit".
So what say you now, Senator Joe Day? Are you with me or against me? Ignoring me just won’t do. Please send your answer to the following address just as Brad Green did. I don’t know where I will be from day to day these days. Like it or not you are all now witnesses to my sad complaints. I demand an answer from you in writing even if it is to refuse this demand to do your job. Your friend the Yankee lawyer, David Lutz can turn his back on me then sneak away and try to hide but you are a Canadian public servant now. You must answer me in a timely fashion. I am part of the Canadian Public and a citizen that came to your office in the constituency that I have been hanging my hat for over two months. I demand assistance from the Senator appointed to watch over us and expect you to act with the integrity that is mandated by your license to practice law for a fee. Trust me, I am wise to the delaying and denying game. Forget trying to argue jurisdiction. I am here. What do you think? Should I run for Senator if Lord manages to call an election for one? I can be reached by local phone # 506 434-1379 but everything I say from here on out I want recorded in the Public Record because it appears that lawyers think I must sue the Queen in the USA. Do you think she will get pissed? The reason question is can she afford the relief. Check the bottom line of my first two complaints. Anne McLellan has made the Crown a conspirator against me. Methinks she owes me three times the loss. Now we all know the reason for the cover up. Too many lawyer/politicians in Boston assisted the lawyer, Charles J. Kickham Jr. assist the ex FBI agent William J. Kickham in his crimes against my Clan.
If any of the above named parties don’t like anything I have stated, Please sue me. I dare ya. I promise I will not file any sort of motion to dismiss the matter but I will demand a jury. I will call many witnesses in my defense. I think the first one would be Mr. Harper. Wouldn’t it be fun if he was a hostile one?
Cya’ll in CourtJ
David R. Amos
153 Alvin Ave.
Milton, MA. 02186
Certificate of Service
I, David R. Amos, a Canadian citizen presently within the jurisdiction of the Province of New Brunswick in the County of Kings on Friday the 13th of August, 2004 delivered the above named material to the office of Senator Joseph A. Day at 14 Everett St. Hampton, NB. I will also email many people in many places the proof that this was done on this day. Check into my beefs with the USPS and look at the news about the Canadian Postal Service’s political issues with Paul Martin today and it should be obvious why this is necessary for me to do in person.
David R. Amos
September 10th 2004
Paul J.J. Cavalluzzo Jean-Pierre Kingsley
C/o Veena Verma C/o Diane R. Davidson
Cavalluzzo, Hayes, Shilton, McIntyre & Cornish Elections Canada
PO Box 507, Station B 257 Slater Street
Ottawa, ON K1P 5P6 Ottawa, ON K1P 5G4
David Orchard Peter MacKay
C/o Peter Rosenthal C/o Arthur Hamilton
Roach, Schwartz and Associates Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP
688 St. Clair Avenue West 2100 Scotia Plaza, 40 King St. W.
Toronto, ON M6C 1B1 Toronto, ON M5H 3C2
RE: Corruption
Hey,
It has been over three months since I returned to Canada and contacted you all. Now that I have returned to the USA I will wait only three more weeks for you to act ethically and uphold the Public Trust. CTV or whatever said Fundy was a riding to watch but nobody mentioned me. I answered openly and honestly to every question put to me in every debate that I was allowed to attend. I had lots to say and now my work speaks for itself as I fall silent. Now I have a few questions. I would appreciate honest answers.
Pursuant to my many contacts and various conversations to you folks or those of your offices, please find enclosed an exact copy of all material sent to Jean Chretien and Brian Mulroney. The copy of wiretap tape numbered 139 is served upon Diane R. Davidson, Veena Verma, Peter Rosenthal, Arthur Hamilton and Peter MacKay in confidence as officers of the court in order that it may be properly investigated by the Arar Commission. May I suggest that Veena Verma solicit the Arar Commisson to demand CSIS to provide them with the six original tapes given to the priest, Bill Elliot and the Sussex Detachment of the RCMP in order that they may be investigated as well.
By the time you read this letter and study the contents hopefully I will have returned to the USA and stood in court once more in order to defend my Clan’s rights and interests. I will be inserting this letter to you folks in the Public Record of many courts in the USA. If you act ethically and quickly I will see no reason to sue you. However I will be calling you all to testify to what you know to be true. Shame on all of you for allowing my country to throw me back into the clutches of Attorney General Ashcroft without any regard for my safety. If I die my blood will be on your hands.
Too many mobsters and crooked FEDS want these god-damned tapes for me to think otherwise. As you can see I have signed statements from both a US Attorney and a District Attorney claiming for over one year now that these tapes are part of our Probate Actions. I will prove that they are not two more times before I complain of every lawyer and law enforcement authority that I have contacted in two countries.
Oct 3rd, 2004, I will count you all amongst the conspirators against me if I do not receive an answer from you that I agree with by that date. Now you know I ain’t joking.
Mr. Rosenthal, I have no doubt that you are a clever fellow. Teaching Math is clean work. I admire that you only choose to practice law when you consider a matter to be of great social importance. After my speaking with David Orchard and studying his actions since that time. I believe David Orchard is all about David Orchard and the Public Trust only interests him when it affects his interests. The minor spit and chew about the demise of his former party is somewhat petty considering the far more important issues that are afoot these days. Would not your services be better placed in assisting me in compelling the governments to uphold the law and the Public Trust? I ask that you study the material I have provided closely and then think about your own words and that of your friends. They are hereto attached for your review. My question is don’t you think it would benefit all Canadians if I complained of Anne McLellan and Wayne Easter in order to make them accountable for their lack of diligence in protecting my dumb ass? Just because I am a pigheaded Canadian layman, it does not follow that Anne or Wayne should allow Ashcroft and his cohorts to try to send me to Cuba without counsel. Many lawyers wish for me to simply disappear or quit so that they could continue to practice law for lucre or malice. I have no doubt many lawyers like Alan Dershowitz and even his adversary Bob Barr would like to see me tortured or beat to death by like H. Pail Rico was. Do you see how easily I predicted his demise. That was a nobrainer. What say you? Do you wish to assist me or not? If not give my friend, Byron Prior a call. Now there is man in great need of a good lawyer with a sense of social conscience and a bit of integrity to boot. Every Canadian should feel offended by T Alex Hickman.
Mr. MacKay thanks for proving to the world what a lawyer’s word is worth even when he signs his hand to it. Your little back stabbing trick with David Orchard proved my point in spades. I really don’t know what Orchard is whining about. Hasn’t he heard a few lawyer jokes in his time on the planet? Much truth is told in jest. Check my work before you call me a liar. From one Maritmer to another if you asked me to step outside I would smile and quit talking and start swinging immediately. I am a much better man than that fat bastard that went to Harvard and you can tell him I said so. My question to you sir, is do you wish to call me a liar and then step outside to settle it or argue me in Court? Better yet, do you and the fat bastard wish to tag team against me or go at me one on one in court or out of it? All that I have said is true. I read where the fat bastard lost a hundred pounds in order to help get reelected. If I did that I would be half the man I am now but I would still have enough sand left to take you both on. The MacKay Clan should be ashamed of you. How is that for picking a fight? EH?
Ms. Davidson, please find enclosed the documents proving I did what was required of me on July 6th in order to get my deposit back. When may I expect the money? Why would your help call me about this stuff without checking with Ms. Chappell first? You always referred me to her. It is not my fault if you lose the records. Right?
Ms. Davidson, I have another couple of very important questions as well. When I appeared at the local Canada Elections Office with my secretary and a witness as required, Ms Chappell would not allow me to begin the process of registering as a Canidate until she received a call from some unnamed lawyer from Ottawa. I know that person must have been you or someone who spoke for you.
Ms. Chappell was waiting for you, Ms. Davidson to decide as to whether or not I could run for Parliament. I can easily prove byway of phone records and emails that I had resolved these issues months ago with the top dogs in your office long before an election was ever called. I then did it once again after the election was called and then again with Ms. Chappell before I returned to Canada and then the day before coming to her office. The deliberate delay was obvious to all and very offensive. What would have Rob Moore or John Herron’s friend David Lutz have done if you had tried such a trick with them, Sue you? Why should I be any different? I do have the same Rights. If you don’t think I would be just as diligent as any lawyer when protecting my rights, you have seriously underestimated me. Call my bluff. I dare ya.
Ms Davidson, you are not a judge nor are you a Member of Parliament. You have no right to make a law or decide on it. If there was some sort of legal question why did you not address it months ago with me? It was my opinion that you were simply delaying me until the clock tolled two o’clock and then I would not be allowed to have my name on the ballot. I truly believe you were acting in the best interest of other lawyers rather that upholding the Public Trust placed in you. When I kept demanding to just know your name or to talk to you, I was denied that right. However I did manage to become a candidate by exactly two o’clock because you knew as sure as I am typing this that I would have complained of you in a heartbeat after two o’clock. What say you Ms. Davidson? Do you disagree with my opinion of what happened on June 7th? If you were not the lawyer attempting to illegally delay me then that person was acting under your authority. Correct? You are the Deputy Chief Electoral Officer and Chief Legal Counsel. I am just the self appointed Chief of my little Clan but as you can see I have no fear of arguing with fancy upper Canadian lawyers. Do you wish to explain or should I summons you to court to get an answer? Again I ask when do I get my money back? My accountant has filed his work quite a while ago as well. What is the reason for the delay now? Ain’t it kinda funny how the Queen would not take my check but I must accept hers?
Ms. Verma, I recall our conversation vividly and can easily prove my following contacts with you. I already know the answer but my only question to you is WHY?
As I continue my legal battles in the USA, I want you all to know that win or lose I was trying to protect your rights too against the bastards that created the DHS etc.
Cya’ll in CourtJ
David R. Amos
153 Alvin Ave.
Milton, MA. 02186
More laws won't mean less terror
Experts warn of 'giving the devil the benefit of the law'
Law Times By David Gambrill
Expanding the power of criminal law will not stop terrorism, say legal academics, and may instead lead to the permanent imposition of extraordinary emergency measures and concentrated state power.
Quoting a character in the Robert Bolt play, A Man for All Seasons, Oren Gross, a Benjamin Cardoso School of Law professor, issued a general warning against "giving the devil the benefit of the law" in order to make the public feel more secure.
"Extravagent terrorist attacks such as those on Sept. 11 tend to bring about a rush to legislate," Gross told a legal scholars' conference convened to discuss the federal government's new antiterrorism legislation, bill C-36. "The preventative relief [is thought to] be, 'If only we add new powers to police, if only we add to the Criminal Code, if only we revamp and reinvigorate existing offences, then our nation is going to be secure.'"
But such logic tends to lead to a concentration of power at the level of government, he says. Citizens may relinquish their civil liberties out of fear, encouraging the state "do whatever it takes" to make terrorism stop, he says.
"Governments tend to overreact," says Gross. "Terrorism from below may, to some extent, be replaced with terrorism from above." Legal scholars who spoke at the conference echoed Gross' caution. Some worried that Canada is permanently entrenching the temporary emergency powers found in the 1988 Emergencies Act.
"My answer to the question, 'Can emergency powers be normalized?' is yes, they can be," says U of T law professor David Dyzenhais, a South African studying the emergency powers employed by the South African government under apartheid. "But when they are normalized, what we have is a violation of the spirit of the rule of law."
U of T math professor Peter Rosenthal, a lawyer at Roach Schwartz and Associates in Toronto, suggested the federal government should have used its powers under the 1988 Emergencies Act instead of drafting new anti-terrorist legislation.
Enacted by the Mulroney government, the Emergencies Act gives the federal government limited exceptional powers to deal with four types of emergencies: threats to public welfare, threats to public order, international emergencies, and war.
International emergencies, says the act, arise "from acts of intimidation or coercion, or the real or imminent threat of serious force or violence."
For an international emergency, the act can be put into affect for 60 days and must be reviewed by Parliament before the deadline can be extended. It includes powers to limit or restrict travel, ban public assemblies, remove non-citizens from the country, and enter and search premises without a warrant. The powers in the act are explicitly subject to the Charter.
The Emergencies Act replaced the War Measures Act, which the Trudeau government used to arrest and detain 465 Quebeckers in 1970. The federal government invoked the War Measures Act after the FLQ kidnapped Quebec provincial cabinet minister Pierre Laporte, who was found assassinated one day after the act was declared.
The so-called "October Crisis," when the War Measures Act was implemented, started a debate in Canada about when it is appropriate to suspend civil liberties. The Trudeau government came under heavy criticism for employing the act.
U of T constitutional law professor Lorraine Weinrib noted the federal government has studiously avoided using the language of "emergency measures," even though it has incorporated such emergency powers into its anti-terrorist legislation. The same emergency powers are available under the Emergencies Act, she says, albeit for limited periods of time and under strict supervision of Parliament.
"I would say the government did not use the Emergencies Act here in response to the problem of terrorism because it did not want to engage in this type of review process," says Weinrib. "It preferred to continue what has been highly discredited under the War Measures Act experience - namely, the concentration of power in the executive."
For this reason, many scholars at the conference encouraged the courts to review the legislation carefully. Federal government lawyers have called the proposed anti-terrorist legislation"Charter-proof." But that doesn't mean the anti-terrorism legislation should be enacted, says U of T law professor Kent Roach.
"We may too quick to accept . . . what the government's lawyers — or indeed any lawyers — conclude it is permissible to do," he says.
Roach listed several extraordinary police powers found in bill C-36. Most notably, the bill allows police to arrest and detain a person without a warrant, on suspicion the suspect may be carrying out a terrorist activity. It also creates "investigative hearings," in which suspects are compelled to give testimony that might incriminate them.
Roach was particularly critical of the hearing process, the powers of which, he insisted, haven't been around since the English 'Star Chamber' in 1641.
"Compelling a person to talk to the police in an investigation in which he or she may well be implicated offends our traditions of respect for the right of silence during police investigations," he says. "These traditions date back to the abolition of the Star Chamber in 1641."
The Star Chamber, associated with the English Courts, was reviled for its use of torture. As late as 1614, a Somerset clergyman, Edmond Peacham, was interrogated on the rack before the Star Chamber in the presence of the attorney general at the time, Sir Edward Coke.
Roach acknowledged the bill gives detained individuals the right to counsel at such hearings, but such representation provides cold comfort. "It gives people subject to investigative hearing the right to counsel — even though, in many cases, the lawyer will simply have to inform the target that he or she must talk or else face prosecution or continued detention," he says. One danger in forcing people to talk is that they might lie, says Roach. A combination of perjury and prosecutorial zeal could may lead to the kind of wrongful convictions associated with the "Birmingham Six" and "Guilford Four" in England, he says.
In the early 1970s, the IRA bombed pubs in Birmingham and Guilford, England, killing more than 21 people. Under pressure to convict the terrorists, police arrested 10 people in connection with the attacks.
In 1989 and 1991, respectively, a British court of appeal released the Guilford Four and Birmingham Six after finding they had been wrongly convicted.
This article does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no responsibility for any loss occasioned to any person acting or refraining from action in reliance upon material contained in this article is accepted by the author or Canada Law Book Inc.
(c)Law Times Inc. 2004. All rights reserved.
----- Original Message -----
From: David Amos
To: GBFamilyLaw@cs.com
Cc: info@nationalcenterformen.org
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 10:42 AM
Subject: Fw: Guess who is blogging this email right now
----- Original Message -----
From: David Amos
To: grewag1@parl.gc.ca ; grewag@parl.gc.ca
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 4:17 PM
Subject: Fw: Guess who is blogging this email right now
----- Original Message -----
From: David Amos
To: Craig.Chouinard@gnb.ca ; Tim.Porter@gnb.ca ; Governor.Rell@po.state.ct.us ; smay@pattersonpalmer.ca ; johnduggan@legalaid.nf.ca ; brenda.boyd@RCMP-GRC.gc.ca ; McLellan.A@parl.gc.ca ; david@lutz.nb.ca ; cynthia.merlini@dfait-maeci.gc.ca ; ethics@harvard.edu ; INFO7@elections.ca ; inquiry.admin@bellnet.ca ; cotlei@parl.gc.ca ; Robert.Creedon@state.ma.us ; Brian.A.Joyce@state.ma.us ; Jack.Hart@state.ma.us ; Rep.WalterTimilty@hou.state.ma.us ; Rep.AStephenTobin@hou.state.ma.us ; Dianne.Wilkerson@state.ma.us ; Daphne.Thompson@gems2.gov.bc.ca ; coulter.osborne@oico.on.ca ; WayneGreen@mail.gov.nl.ca ; gallanpm@gov.ns.ca ; anrobins@vac-acc.gc.ca ; cei@nbnet.nb.ca ; Brian Mulcahy ; kbar@nbnet.nb.ca
Cc: ethics@ic.gc.ca ; gisele.osborne@gnb.ca ; dayja@sen.parl.gc.ca ; zedp@parl.gc.ca ; rmooremp@nb.sympatico.ca ; savoya2@parl.gc.ca ; thompg@nb.sympatico.ca ; john_kerry@kerry.senate.gov ; martib@sen.parl.gc.ca ; dougchristielaw@shaw.ca ; Mayor@ci.boston.ma.us ; Stephen.Murphy@ci.boston.ma.us ; geline.williams@state.ma.us
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 3:24 PM
Subject: Guess who is blogging this email right now
I am very upset that Dr. Ward Dean, a very important witness of mine against the public corruption was scooped off the street in front of his wife by federal agents who would not say who they were or where or why they were taking her husband away. This happened as he was coming home from an Grand Jury hearing against the IRS in Florida. This was an overt act against his Constitutional Rights and clearly done by those acting under the Patriot Act.
I must ask everyone what of my friend and am I next? I have called many people today in Canada and the USA that I have already received signed answers from. All they do is play dumb or deny or defer me to some other bad acting bastard or worse yet laugh at me. Shame on all of you. You may think you are free but just wait the lawyers may have bastards do it to you someday to protect their mask of virtue. At least none of you can ever say you that didn't know.
Why you failed to do anything to protect your own civil rights is way beyond my simple mind to understand. Do you all think you are above the law and the rights of ordinary people ain't worth a tinkers damn? Well guess ain't being took away without a fight? All the bells and whistles are going off like they did the last time they illegally sent me to jail on October 1st. I am staying far away from anyone and am a threat to no one. If they attack me I will die protecting my freedom from the wrongs of lawyers rather than go to jail or Cuba so they can get rid of me there. If the worst happens I want the world to know that my blood can be found on your hands.
----- Original Message -----
From: David Amos
To: bledrew@uOttawa.ca
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 9:36 AM
Subject: Fw: Small wonder the lady speaking for Bernard Shapiro believed me
----- Original Message -----
From: David Amos
To: news@hilltimes.com
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 10:26 AM
Subject: Fw: Small wonder the lady speaking for Bernard Shapiro believed me
You folks are so full of shit I can't stand it
----- Original Message -----
From: David Amos
To: illuminati_news@comcast.net
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 7:41 PM
Subject: Fw: Small wonder the lady speaking for Bernard Shapiro believed me
----- Original Message -----
From: David Amos
To: ethics@ic.gc.ca ; gisele.osborne@gnb.ca ; dayja@sen.parl.gc.ca ; Pelletier, Raymond F. ; zedp@parl.gc.ca ; rmooremp@nb.sympatico.ca ; savoya2@parl.gc.ca ; thompg@nb.sympatico.ca ; john_kerry@kerry.senate.gov ; martib@sen.parl.gc.ca ; dougchristielaw@shaw.ca ; Mayor@ci.boston.ma.us ; Stephen.Murphy@ci.boston.ma.us ; geline.williams@state.ma.us ; Brian Mulcahy ; madanr@ojp.usdoj.gov ; strategis@ic.gc.ca ; wilson.howie@ic.gc.ca ; cbisson@mccarthy.ca ; lynn.morrison@oico.on.ca
Cc: Governor Office ; Governor.Rell@po.state.ct.us ; smay@pattersonpalmer.ca ; johnduggan@legalaid.nf.ca ; brenda.boyd@RCMP-GRC.gc.ca ; McLellan.A@parl.gc.ca ; david@lutz.nb.ca ; cynthia.merlini@dfait-maeci.gc.ca ; ethics@harvard.edu ; INFO7@elections.ca ; inquiry.admin@bellnet.ca ; cotlei@parl.gc.ca ; Robert.Creedon@state.ma.us ; Brian.A.Joyce@state.ma.us ; Jack.Hart@state.ma.us ; Rep.WalterTimilty@hou.state.ma.us ; Rep.AStephenTobin@hou.state.ma.us ; Dianne.Wilkerson@state.ma.us ; Daphne.Thompson@gems2.gov.bc.ca ; coulter.osborne@oico.on.ca ; WayneGreen@mail.gov.nl.ca ; gallanpm@gov.ns.ca ; anrobins@vac-acc.gc.ca ; cei@nbnet.nb.ca ; kbar@nbnet.nb.ca ; Byron Prior
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 12:52 PM
Subject: Small wonder the lady speaking for Bernard Shapiro believed me
. Senator Joe Day should have given him my material a long long time ago. I thought Howie Wilson still had the job because everything was kinda murky within Strategis at the time and nobody would respond to me. Since my affairs in the USA are beginning to develop in a positive direction, now Joe Day and the others are just starting to pretend that they are ethical? Not on my watch. I have yet to find out who the hell the Ethics Counselor is for the Senate but rest assured I will find out and forward him all that I will send to you. Good luck with your conscience folks. Perhaps someone should call me soon. 506 434-1379
Friday the 13th of August, 2004
Senator Joseph A. Day Ethics Counselor, Howard Wilson
14 Everett St. 66 Slater St., 22nd Floor
Hampton, NB Ottawa, ON. K1A 0C9
Prime Minister, Paul Martin Geoff Reagan c/o Irwin Cotler,
80 Wellington Street 900 Justice Building
Ottawa, ON. K1A 0A2 Ottawa, ON. K1A 0A6
Eva Plunkett Inspector General (CSIS) Philippe Rabot
340 Laurier Avenue West RCMP External Review Committee
Ottawa, ON. K1A 0P8 P.O. Box 1159, Station B
Ottawa, ON. K1P 5R2
RE: Corruption
Hey Joe,
The fact that you said I was not worth voting for is no matter to me. I just wish my fellow Canadians had the right to vote you out of your job. That is one thing I agree with Mr. Lord about. To me you are just another lawyer who couldn’t get elected so you were politically appointed to a high government position for the benefit of Irving interests. Now that you are in public service not only must you obey the Code of Conduct of your chosen profession, you must act ethically as a well paid federal employee and speak for the public good. Forget your former employer’s interests and do your job.
It is time to check the work of many high officials and mine as well. I demand that you study of the enclosed material then forward it all to the Prime Minister Paul Martin. Ask him to forward copies of it all to the other above named government employees and to the Arar Commission in particular. I can easily prove prior contact to all the above named persons or their offices and I believe they should be expecting to see this stuff. The CD of the copy of wiretap tape numbered 139 is served upon you as an officer of the court in confidence in order that it may be properly investigated. I have given you many more documents than the ones I will mention in the following paragraphs. I will send a copy of this letter to many people as a double check on your ethics.
One of the documents of foremost importance to me is a recent letter Attorney General Brad Green sent to me dated August 3rd. It is attached to the letter and all the other material I had delivered to Bernard Lord and Frank McKenna just after Canada Day. I deem the aforesaid letter to be so important because he is the first Canadian public servant in any office to even admit knowledge my concerns and allegations in two months of waiting for a proper response. His position in public service and his answer forever prove just how bad things really are in Canada and the USA. I am not sorry for the delay in providing you with this material as I planned and stated within the enclosed email. If you had wanted it, you would have returned my calls or answered my email.
I had spoken to many people about my concerns as I ran for Parliament. I made certain that the proper authorities knew of my allegations the instant I was on Canadian soil. If our government was on the up and up, someone should have sent the cops around to pick this stuff up or at least ask me a few questions a long time ago. I cannot wait any longer for my country to act properly in my defense. The Yankees now want me in court.
The recent letter from Brad Green and the actions of some other bad actors in Fredericton and the USA gave me cause to pause, rethink and rewrite a bunch of stuff. One would think that Henrick Tonning, the first judge that Green had ever appointed or the unnamed duty counsel in court on the first day of Brad’s new plan to defend the rights of the people would have informed him that I was very pissed off and still in New Brunswick. The Sheriff who refused to identify himself in Henrik’s court that day was more than willing to take me away and under his jurisdiction. What province writes the Sheriff’s paycheck? Even the local rumormill had enough time to generate enough gossip from July 29th to August 3rd for Brad Green to be adequately informed before he wrote such a ridiculous letter to me. Clearly Brad paid no heed my fair warning to lawyers about making one false move. Maybe he should call the former Attorney General in New Hampshire and ask Peter Heed why he paid no heed to me. Now I will prove to both Mr Heed and Brad Green that I wasn’t joking and that I am well within the jurisdiction of law enforcement in both New Brunswick and New Hampshire.
If the Fredericton City Police arrest me as I approach the legislature one day very soon, Brad Green, Bruce Noble and I will have lots to argue about in years to come in many courts. I will be filing a complaint against them and several others with the Law Society anyway. I am looking to hire an ethical lawyer to sue the bastards long before the Law Society gets around to figuring out how to ignore my allegations. What would you do if you were I? Do you know an ethical lawyer that I can discuss this with? Or would I fare better if I acted ethically in a Pro Se fashion?
My encounter with the Ombudsman, Bernard Richard proved much to me about NB politicians. I didn’t believe what he said about Wayne Steeves the second he mentioned Connie Fogal. He tried so hard to argue about jurisdiction that he maintained Rule One of the Code of Professional Conduct of the New Brunswick Law Society is not about integrity but jurisdiction. No lawyer is that dumb and the last thing I would want is such a man to speak for me. So I promptly told him I would see him in court and ended our conversation. He was obviously arguing against me for the benefit of Brad Green rather than making a sincere and ethical effort to listen to me and address my concerns to the powers that be on my behalf. Richard likely has few Liberal friends to chum with. For all I know he may have just got back from Larry’s Gulch so I allowed him to continue on the fishing expedition byway of email. For his information just in case he is that dumb, I brought up the subject of integrity so he would stop arguing jurisdiction and act more ethically and diligently as a lawyer. When he continued, I quit talking and sought proof of contact. Lawyers must maintain their integrity no matter the jurisdiction or issue.
I can easily refute the jurisdictional argument of both Mr. Richard and Brad Green. I am used to that legal dodge. Thirty-three years ago a RCMP officer charged me with speeding by within the city limits of Fredericton. When I questioned his jurisdiction the Crown was quick to inform me that the RCMP have jurisdiction over everyone everywhere in Canada. If I were to unbuckle my seat belt in defiance of a NB law as I drove to Hampton to serve this material upon a lawyer employed as a Senator in the federal government, in what court would I appear? What if I served this material upon the cop that had the authority stop me? If the matter was heard in Hampton or Sussex Provincial Court shouldn’t Judge Henrik Tonning immediately recuse himself because of his words to me in court on July 29th. Would I not have the right to make a federal case out of what began as a seat belt offense and change the jurisdiction to the USA?
A far better example is what happened on June 24th. A man who claimed represent the Crown as the Sergeant at Arms in the New Brunswick legislature claimed that he and the Fredericton PD had jurisdiction over me and the right to throw me out of the public building. However when I tried to give them this stuff as the Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan and Attorney General Brad Green have both suggested, they refused. What right did they have to do so? Should I file a complaint against the Crown in the USA? I was thrown out of a building in NB. Who defends the Crown if not Green?
Senator Day, make certain that Jack Hooper of CSIS sends someone to see the priest, Bill Elliott and get the stuff I gave to him the night of his debate on June 21st. Everybody in the churchyard watched that old man holler at me as I gave it to him. Now Mr. Waldman can listen to what Mr. Harper was harping about on June 22nd on the CBC, As I told the priest there were three original wiretap tapes within that envelope I gave him. The tapes are important evidence for the Arar Commission. If nothing else their mere existence proves how far the FEDS in two countries will go to cover things up. Let me know if the priest denies he got them or Hooper won’t give them up, I have several more hidden in Canada that the Arar Commission can have. Hooper can hoop and holler about National Security all he wants. I must protect my ass if he won’t, If you look at the photo I have provided, you will see me talking to a RCMP officer that was guarding Harper in Sussex on June 19th. Now you know what I was talking about to him. What I want to know is that cop’s name. Harper wasn’t long spilling the beans to his political advantage on CBC but his lawyers weren’t long shutting him up on June 24th after Waldman demanded that he testify at the Inquiry. Why is that?
Waldman should have known of me if Arar’s lawyers at CCR in the USA had kept him properly informed. Rest assured that I did as soon as I became aware of him. During our conversation I know I said enough for him to check my words. His silence spoke volumes.
Mr. Arar’s lawyers had no fear of filing a complaint against Ashcroft and the others in the USA after they received my stuff last November. I see no further progress with that suit since it was filed last January. Why have they ignored me? Did they make a deal and settle? Why have they fallen so silent within the inquiry in Canada?
If you don’t believe me about what Mr. Harper knows, call Arthur Hamilton and ask him about the little talk we had about this a little while ago. Mr. Hamilton can never say he doesn’t know because I saved his voicemail to me. I have no doubt that he has had a long talk with our new MP Rob Moore by now. Why are they so silent?
I have many questions to ask Geoff Regan and Anne McLellan about the Arar Commission. Geoff has no time to return my call but lots of time to golf with Clinton and McKenna. I demand to know if the many documents that caused the delay in the inquiry were mine. If not, why not? I did do as Anne McLellan suggested and gave this stuff to both Customs and Immigration the instant I landed in Canadian jurisdiction. If I am not called to testify, I will never understand. I did manage to talk to Veena Verma and she had no answers for me only arguments about jurisdiction as usual.
Your friend, Mr. Zed can never say he don’t know because as you can see I served his law office this stuff on June 25th the day before he and John Herron greeted Paul Martin at the airport. After your review of this stuff you must confess it is obvious to all why Paul Zed and his friend Frank McKenna have been struck so dumb. Paul Zed was elected to speak for that politically minded priest amongst others, correct? Perhaps after they voted according to their conscience they should act according to it as well.
I know that I have proved what everybody knows. The word of a lawyer is worthless. Peter MacKay also proved that to all the true Progressive Conservatives in Canada. The fact that another lawyer, John Crosbie advised the former Alliance party on what to say is too funny and sad for the words of this letter. One reason I came home and ran for Parliament is to sooth my own soul because I found Mr. Harper and his buddies to be a truly dangerous bunch of characters. Crosbie did too for awhile anyway. Ain’t it funny how he now sings a different tune? There is no doubt that the old lawyer Paul Martin is a monumental a crook. The boat in Sidney proved that to me two days after the election. He can play well within Mulroney’s league. It was truly sad that so many Canadians were compelled to vote for Martin simply because they were too scared that Harper may lead our country down a garden path and under an evil Bush.
Perhaps the NDP should check my work closely and then help me expose all the crooks in both the Liberal and Conservative camps. I will give this stuff to their local lawyer leader Ms. Weir. Maybe it is time for the NDP to shine for the benefit of all Canadians. Even though the NDP have only 19 seats in Parliament I believe they have the power to inspire a non-confidence vote and cause another election. I think the NDP politicians should think about the following statement a long time then review how they made out in the last election. I did say at the Moss Glen debate that the NDP party was the best spot to place a vote. However NDP people I know argued with me saying that if they did that their vote would be wasted and Harper might get in, so they must vote out of fear for a Liberal. Therefore I fall back on what I had said during the Hampton debate in that every ballot should have one more line on it "None of the above" then I am certain many more Canadians would exercise their right to vote. Many did agree.
Senator Day I did come across your wife in the Canada Elections office as she worked in support of Herron. Please don’t deny the fact that the person seated beside your wife in Hampton laughed and applauded at many of my remarks, Everybody heard what I said to Herron in front of Rob Moore about suing him. Herron is foolish if he thought I was kidding. Herron is a layman with few political friends. I spoke to him very openly and honestly after the debate in Moss Glen. It should be interesting to see whom he and Rob Moore manage to hire for lawyers to defend them from my actions. I look forward to meeting a judge but I am not certain I would be allowed a jury of my peers. Lawyers do have an unfair stranglehold on Canadian justice. As you check my work, you should see that I am out to shame all lawyers and the political ones in particular. None of this would have been necessary if just one lawyer had upheld their oath or one public servant had blown the whistle. Why is not the question. The answer is Filthy Lucre.
Today is Friday the 13th. I am expected to stand in court in Boston and argue allegations of criminal harassment made against me by a lawyer who has practiced crimes against me. Clearly I am not making an appearance. My kids and I will remain in this jurisdiction. I suspect foul play and that it is a ploy to make me return to the USA. I have little doubt that agents of the DHS would never allow me to appear in that court. I notified everyone down in Boston that I look forward to trial. Monday will tell the tale.
In closing I must say I considered myself a raging success to finally break surface in the media and in an Irving owned newspaper of all places. A former Irving lawyer needs no explanation as to the reason for my joy. That said, let’s see if I can make the Internet work for me in a grassroots sort of way. The Irvings are a little behind the times in that regard. Although I do not wear a blue coat, I did give the folks in Fundy one last chance to vote for a PC (Pissed off Candidate) and I tried to do it in a fun fashion so that my efforts would be remembered. Read the Kings County Record again to check my words. As I watch the boob tube, I find the most honest reporting of the political circus in America can be found on the Canadian comedy shows. The stuff on Barack Obama, Ralph Nader, Melanie Sloan and the Clintons should be pretty funny to you as well as you read the documents I have provided. Now all I can say is Hooray for Canada and thanks to the folks in Fundy that did vote for me. I am glad that at least one percent understood and agreed with me. Quite likely not one of them was a lawyer. Now I only need one lawyer in the right place in government to do the right thing and things will change for the better. Until that happens I will continue torturing lawyers with dilemmas that a simple application of ethics could easily solve. It is just a matter of time before one will break rank with the crooks and become a truly honourable hero for the common man. As I said in my first political speech I am a son of the Keith Clan whose roots can be found in Fundy. Although I have separated myself from that Clan and founded my own in order to declare a Blood Feud in my own name, I will always honour from whence I came. I simply don’t care what lawyers or politicians think of me Although I have no religion, I have faith in my forefather’s motto "Veritas Vincit".
So what say you now, Senator Joe Day? Are you with me or against me? Ignoring me just won’t do. Please send your answer to the following address just as Brad Green did. I don’t know where I will be from day to day these days. Like it or not you are all now witnesses to my sad complaints. I demand an answer from you in writing even if it is to refuse this demand to do your job. Your friend the Yankee lawyer, David Lutz can turn his back on me then sneak away and try to hide but you are a Canadian public servant now. You must answer me in a timely fashion. I am part of the Canadian Public and a citizen that came to your office in the constituency that I have been hanging my hat for over two months. I demand assistance from the Senator appointed to watch over us and expect you to act with the integrity that is mandated by your license to practice law for a fee. Trust me, I am wise to the delaying and denying game. Forget trying to argue jurisdiction. I am here. What do you think? Should I run for Senator if Lord manages to call an election for one? I can be reached by local phone # 506 434-1379 but everything I say from here on out I want recorded in the Public Record because it appears that lawyers think I must sue the Queen in the USA. Do you think she will get pissed? The reason question is can she afford the relief. Check the bottom line of my first two complaints. Anne McLellan has made the Crown a conspirator against me. Methinks she owes me three times the loss. Now we all know the reason for the cover up. Too many lawyer/politicians in Boston assisted the lawyer, Charles J. Kickham Jr. assist the ex FBI agent William J. Kickham in his crimes against my Clan.
If any of the above named parties don’t like anything I have stated, Please sue me. I dare ya. I promise I will not file any sort of motion to dismiss the matter but I will demand a jury. I will call many witnesses in my defense. I think the first one would be Mr. Harper. Wouldn’t it be fun if he was a hostile one?
Cya’ll in CourtJ
David R. Amos
153 Alvin Ave.
Milton, MA. 02186
Certificate of Service
I, David R. Amos, a Canadian citizen presently within the jurisdiction of the Province of New Brunswick in the County of Kings on Friday the 13th of August, 2004 delivered the above named material to the office of Senator Joseph A. Day at 14 Everett St. Hampton, NB. I will also email many people in many places the proof that this was done on this day. Check into my beefs with the USPS and look at the news about the Canadian Postal Service’s political issues with Paul Martin today and it should be obvious why this is necessary for me to do in person.
David R. Amos
September 10th 2004
Paul J.J. Cavalluzzo Jean-Pierre Kingsley
C/o Veena Verma C/o Diane R. Davidson
Cavalluzzo, Hayes, Shilton, McIntyre & Cornish Elections Canada
PO Box 507, Station B 257 Slater Street
Ottawa, ON K1P 5P6 Ottawa, ON K1P 5G4
David Orchard Peter MacKay
C/o Peter Rosenthal C/o Arthur Hamilton
Roach, Schwartz and Associates Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP
688 St. Clair Avenue West 2100 Scotia Plaza, 40 King St. W.
Toronto, ON M6C 1B1 Toronto, ON M5H 3C2
RE: Corruption
Hey,
It has been over three months since I returned to Canada and contacted you all. Now that I have returned to the USA I will wait only three more weeks for you to act ethically and uphold the Public Trust. CTV or whatever said Fundy was a riding to watch but nobody mentioned me. I answered openly and honestly to every question put to me in every debate that I was allowed to attend. I had lots to say and now my work speaks for itself as I fall silent. Now I have a few questions. I would appreciate honest answers.
Pursuant to my many contacts and various conversations to you folks or those of your offices, please find enclosed an exact copy of all material sent to Jean Chretien and Brian Mulroney. The copy of wiretap tape numbered 139 is served upon Diane R. Davidson, Veena Verma, Peter Rosenthal, Arthur Hamilton and Peter MacKay in confidence as officers of the court in order that it may be properly investigated by the Arar Commission. May I suggest that Veena Verma solicit the Arar Commisson to demand CSIS to provide them with the six original tapes given to the priest, Bill Elliot and the Sussex Detachment of the RCMP in order that they may be investigated as well.
By the time you read this letter and study the contents hopefully I will have returned to the USA and stood in court once more in order to defend my Clan’s rights and interests. I will be inserting this letter to you folks in the Public Record of many courts in the USA. If you act ethically and quickly I will see no reason to sue you. However I will be calling you all to testify to what you know to be true. Shame on all of you for allowing my country to throw me back into the clutches of Attorney General Ashcroft without any regard for my safety. If I die my blood will be on your hands.
Too many mobsters and crooked FEDS want these god-damned tapes for me to think otherwise. As you can see I have signed statements from both a US Attorney and a District Attorney claiming for over one year now that these tapes are part of our Probate Actions. I will prove that they are not two more times before I complain of every lawyer and law enforcement authority that I have contacted in two countries.
Oct 3rd, 2004, I will count you all amongst the conspirators against me if I do not receive an answer from you that I agree with by that date. Now you know I ain’t joking.
Mr. Rosenthal, I have no doubt that you are a clever fellow. Teaching Math is clean work. I admire that you only choose to practice law when you consider a matter to be of great social importance. After my speaking with David Orchard and studying his actions since that time. I believe David Orchard is all about David Orchard and the Public Trust only interests him when it affects his interests. The minor spit and chew about the demise of his former party is somewhat petty considering the far more important issues that are afoot these days. Would not your services be better placed in assisting me in compelling the governments to uphold the law and the Public Trust? I ask that you study the material I have provided closely and then think about your own words and that of your friends. They are hereto attached for your review. My question is don’t you think it would benefit all Canadians if I complained of Anne McLellan and Wayne Easter in order to make them accountable for their lack of diligence in protecting my dumb ass? Just because I am a pigheaded Canadian layman, it does not follow that Anne or Wayne should allow Ashcroft and his cohorts to try to send me to Cuba without counsel. Many lawyers wish for me to simply disappear or quit so that they could continue to practice law for lucre or malice. I have no doubt many lawyers like Alan Dershowitz and even his adversary Bob Barr would like to see me tortured or beat to death by like H. Pail Rico was. Do you see how easily I predicted his demise. That was a nobrainer. What say you? Do you wish to assist me or not? If not give my friend, Byron Prior a call. Now there is man in great need of a good lawyer with a sense of social conscience and a bit of integrity to boot. Every Canadian should feel offended by T Alex Hickman.
Mr. MacKay thanks for proving to the world what a lawyer’s word is worth even when he signs his hand to it. Your little back stabbing trick with David Orchard proved my point in spades. I really don’t know what Orchard is whining about. Hasn’t he heard a few lawyer jokes in his time on the planet? Much truth is told in jest. Check my work before you call me a liar. From one Maritmer to another if you asked me to step outside I would smile and quit talking and start swinging immediately. I am a much better man than that fat bastard that went to Harvard and you can tell him I said so. My question to you sir, is do you wish to call me a liar and then step outside to settle it or argue me in Court? Better yet, do you and the fat bastard wish to tag team against me or go at me one on one in court or out of it? All that I have said is true. I read where the fat bastard lost a hundred pounds in order to help get reelected. If I did that I would be half the man I am now but I would still have enough sand left to take you both on. The MacKay Clan should be ashamed of you. How is that for picking a fight? EH?
Ms. Davidson, please find enclosed the documents proving I did what was required of me on July 6th in order to get my deposit back. When may I expect the money? Why would your help call me about this stuff without checking with Ms. Chappell first? You always referred me to her. It is not my fault if you lose the records. Right?
Ms. Davidson, I have another couple of very important questions as well. When I appeared at the local Canada Elections Office with my secretary and a witness as required, Ms Chappell would not allow me to begin the process of registering as a Canidate until she received a call from some unnamed lawyer from Ottawa. I know that person must have been you or someone who spoke for you.
Ms. Chappell was waiting for you, Ms. Davidson to decide as to whether or not I could run for Parliament. I can easily prove byway of phone records and emails that I had resolved these issues months ago with the top dogs in your office long before an election was ever called. I then did it once again after the election was called and then again with Ms. Chappell before I returned to Canada and then the day before coming to her office. The deliberate delay was obvious to all and very offensive. What would have Rob Moore or John Herron’s friend David Lutz have done if you had tried such a trick with them, Sue you? Why should I be any different? I do have the same Rights. If you don’t think I would be just as diligent as any lawyer when protecting my rights, you have seriously underestimated me. Call my bluff. I dare ya.
Ms Davidson, you are not a judge nor are you a Member of Parliament. You have no right to make a law or decide on it. If there was some sort of legal question why did you not address it months ago with me? It was my opinion that you were simply delaying me until the clock tolled two o’clock and then I would not be allowed to have my name on the ballot. I truly believe you were acting in the best interest of other lawyers rather that upholding the Public Trust placed in you. When I kept demanding to just know your name or to talk to you, I was denied that right. However I did manage to become a candidate by exactly two o’clock because you knew as sure as I am typing this that I would have complained of you in a heartbeat after two o’clock. What say you Ms. Davidson? Do you disagree with my opinion of what happened on June 7th? If you were not the lawyer attempting to illegally delay me then that person was acting under your authority. Correct? You are the Deputy Chief Electoral Officer and Chief Legal Counsel. I am just the self appointed Chief of my little Clan but as you can see I have no fear of arguing with fancy upper Canadian lawyers. Do you wish to explain or should I summons you to court to get an answer? Again I ask when do I get my money back? My accountant has filed his work quite a while ago as well. What is the reason for the delay now? Ain’t it kinda funny how the Queen would not take my check but I must accept hers?
Ms. Verma, I recall our conversation vividly and can easily prove my following contacts with you. I already know the answer but my only question to you is WHY?
As I continue my legal battles in the USA, I want you all to know that win or lose I was trying to protect your rights too against the bastards that created the DHS etc.
Cya’ll in CourtJ
David R. Amos
153 Alvin Ave.
Milton, MA. 02186
More laws won't mean less terror
Experts warn of 'giving the devil the benefit of the law'
Law Times By David Gambrill
Expanding the power of criminal law will not stop terrorism, say legal academics, and may instead lead to the permanent imposition of extraordinary emergency measures and concentrated state power.
Quoting a character in the Robert Bolt play, A Man for All Seasons, Oren Gross, a Benjamin Cardoso School of Law professor, issued a general warning against "giving the devil the benefit of the law" in order to make the public feel more secure.
"Extravagent terrorist attacks such as those on Sept. 11 tend to bring about a rush to legislate," Gross told a legal scholars' conference convened to discuss the federal government's new antiterrorism legislation, bill C-36. "The preventative relief [is thought to] be, 'If only we add new powers to police, if only we add to the Criminal Code, if only we revamp and reinvigorate existing offences, then our nation is going to be secure.'"
But such logic tends to lead to a concentration of power at the level of government, he says. Citizens may relinquish their civil liberties out of fear, encouraging the state "do whatever it takes" to make terrorism stop, he says.
"Governments tend to overreact," says Gross. "Terrorism from below may, to some extent, be replaced with terrorism from above." Legal scholars who spoke at the conference echoed Gross' caution. Some worried that Canada is permanently entrenching the temporary emergency powers found in the 1988 Emergencies Act.
"My answer to the question, 'Can emergency powers be normalized?' is yes, they can be," says U of T law professor David Dyzenhais, a South African studying the emergency powers employed by the South African government under apartheid. "But when they are normalized, what we have is a violation of the spirit of the rule of law."
U of T math professor Peter Rosenthal, a lawyer at Roach Schwartz and Associates in Toronto, suggested the federal government should have used its powers under the 1988 Emergencies Act instead of drafting new anti-terrorist legislation.
Enacted by the Mulroney government, the Emergencies Act gives the federal government limited exceptional powers to deal with four types of emergencies: threats to public welfare, threats to public order, international emergencies, and war.
International emergencies, says the act, arise "from acts of intimidation or coercion, or the real or imminent threat of serious force or violence."
For an international emergency, the act can be put into affect for 60 days and must be reviewed by Parliament before the deadline can be extended. It includes powers to limit or restrict travel, ban public assemblies, remove non-citizens from the country, and enter and search premises without a warrant. The powers in the act are explicitly subject to the Charter.
The Emergencies Act replaced the War Measures Act, which the Trudeau government used to arrest and detain 465 Quebeckers in 1970. The federal government invoked the War Measures Act after the FLQ kidnapped Quebec provincial cabinet minister Pierre Laporte, who was found assassinated one day after the act was declared.
The so-called "October Crisis," when the War Measures Act was implemented, started a debate in Canada about when it is appropriate to suspend civil liberties. The Trudeau government came under heavy criticism for employing the act.
U of T constitutional law professor Lorraine Weinrib noted the federal government has studiously avoided using the language of "emergency measures," even though it has incorporated such emergency powers into its anti-terrorist legislation. The same emergency powers are available under the Emergencies Act, she says, albeit for limited periods of time and under strict supervision of Parliament.
"I would say the government did not use the Emergencies Act here in response to the problem of terrorism because it did not want to engage in this type of review process," says Weinrib. "It preferred to continue what has been highly discredited under the War Measures Act experience - namely, the concentration of power in the executive."
For this reason, many scholars at the conference encouraged the courts to review the legislation carefully. Federal government lawyers have called the proposed anti-terrorist legislation"Charter-proof." But that doesn't mean the anti-terrorism legislation should be enacted, says U of T law professor Kent Roach.
"We may too quick to accept . . . what the government's lawyers — or indeed any lawyers — conclude it is permissible to do," he says.
Roach listed several extraordinary police powers found in bill C-36. Most notably, the bill allows police to arrest and detain a person without a warrant, on suspicion the suspect may be carrying out a terrorist activity. It also creates "investigative hearings," in which suspects are compelled to give testimony that might incriminate them.
Roach was particularly critical of the hearing process, the powers of which, he insisted, haven't been around since the English 'Star Chamber' in 1641.
"Compelling a person to talk to the police in an investigation in which he or she may well be implicated offends our traditions of respect for the right of silence during police investigations," he says. "These traditions date back to the abolition of the Star Chamber in 1641."
The Star Chamber, associated with the English Courts, was reviled for its use of torture. As late as 1614, a Somerset clergyman, Edmond Peacham, was interrogated on the rack before the Star Chamber in the presence of the attorney general at the time, Sir Edward Coke.
Roach acknowledged the bill gives detained individuals the right to counsel at such hearings, but such representation provides cold comfort. "It gives people subject to investigative hearing the right to counsel — even though, in many cases, the lawyer will simply have to inform the target that he or she must talk or else face prosecution or continued detention," he says. One danger in forcing people to talk is that they might lie, says Roach. A combination of perjury and prosecutorial zeal could may lead to the kind of wrongful convictions associated with the "Birmingham Six" and "Guilford Four" in England, he says.
In the early 1970s, the IRA bombed pubs in Birmingham and Guilford, England, killing more than 21 people. Under pressure to convict the terrorists, police arrested 10 people in connection with the attacks.
In 1989 and 1991, respectively, a British court of appeal released the Guilford Four and Birmingham Six after finding they had been wrongly convicted.
This article does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no responsibility for any loss occasioned to any person acting or refraining from action in reliance upon material contained in this article is accepted by the author or Canada Law Book Inc.
(c)Law Times Inc. 2004. All rights reserved.