David Raymond Amos@DavidRayAmos Replying to @DavidRayAmos@Kathryn98967631 and 48 others Methinks much to Scheer's chagrin Mikey Cooper and Bernie Valcourt are doing Canadians a favour this weekend by proving just how evil the Conservatives truly are N'esy Pas?
'Defence without being defensive': Scheer tries to blunt attack lines on racism, deficits
5746 Comments Commenting is now closed for this story.
Friedrich Hohenstaufen Canadians have seen through the far right, xenophobic Conservative Party and are not interested.
David Amos Content disabled Reply to @Friedrich Hohenstaufen: Methinks much to Scheer's chagrin Mikey Cooper and Bernie Valcourt are doing Canadians a favour this weekend by proving just how evil the Conservatives truly are N'esy Pas?
---------- Original message ---------- From: "Harrison, Wanda"<WHarrison@nbpower.com> Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 16:16:42 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: EXT - Attn Faisal Khan Suri I just called To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I will be out of the office until Monday, June 3. I will be periodically checking emails.
Please contact Joanne Regan at jregan@nbpower.com or 458-3711 for any issues.
Thank you
______________________________
__ This e-mail communication (including any or all attachments) is intended only for the use of the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, any use, review, retransmission, distribution, dissemination, copying, printing, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this e-mail, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact the sender and delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout thereof, immediately. Your co-operation is appreciated. Le pr?sent courriel (y compris toute pi?ce jointe) s'adresse uniquement ? son destinataire, qu'il soit une personne ou un organisme, et pourrait comporter des renseignements privil?gi?s ou confidentiels. Si vous n'?tes pas le destinataire du courriel, il est interdit d'utiliser, de revoir, de retransmettre, de distribuer, de diss?miner, de copier ou d'imprimer ce courriel, d'agir en vous y fiant ou de vous en servir de toute autre fa?on. Si vous avez re?u le pr?sent courriel par erreur, pri?re de communiquer avec l'exp?diteur et d'?liminer l'original du courriel, ainsi que toute copie ?lectronique ou imprim?e de celui-ci, imm?diatement. Nous sommes reconnaissants de votre collaboration.
Scheer strips Tory MP of committee role after confrontation with Muslim witness
Michael Cooper had quoted manifesto of accused New Zealand mosque shooter David Cochrane · CBC News · Posted: Jun 01, 2019 9:29 PM ET
The eruption happened during Tuesday's committee hearing, when Cooper took issue with how Suri, the president of the Alberta Muslim Public Affairs Council, described the online history of Bissonnette, the man sentenced to life in prison in February for shooting six people dead in a Quebec City mosque in January, 2017.
"The evidence from Bissonette's computer showed he repeatedly sought content about anti-immigrant, alt-right and conservative commentators, mass murderers, U.S. President Donald Trump, and about Muslims, immigrants living in Quebec," Suri said.
Suri went on to say that people like Robert Bowers — who is alleged to have killed 11 people in a synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh in October — and Brenton Tarrant, who is accused of shooting and killing 51 people at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand in March, were similarly influenced by online hate coming from "alt-right online networks."
Suri told the committee that "online hate is a key factor in enforcing hate in all forms," including Islamophobia and anti-Semitism, and that more efforts should be made to study online hate and its effects in the offline world.
Edmonton constable facing discipline should be taken off streets, rights groups say
Const. Nathan Downing is accused of arresting a witness two weeks before she was set to testify against him Andrea Huncar · CBC News · Posted: May 31, 2019 6:00 AM MT
Human rights groups are calling for an Edmonton constable accused of assault and racism to be removed from patrol duties after more allegations emerged during his disciplinary hearing this week.
The National Council of Canadian Muslims, the Alberta Muslim Public Affairs Council and Hate Free Yeg say Const. Nathan Downing should be reassigned to non-patrol duty while an investigation looks at his recent arrest of a witness who testified against him at a disciplinary hearing, the organizations said Friday in a joint news release.
"Having a police officer in an on-patrol role who is facing these allegations undermines the sense of trust and safety for community members, and as such, we support the call by black and Muslim communities to remove Constable Downing from patrol duties while the investigation is ongoing," wrote Abdul Malik with Hate Free Yeg.
"Because of the nature of the allegations that have been brought forward at this time, immediate action is needed," said Faisal Khan Suri, AMPAC president.
Alberta Muslim Public Affairs Council (AMPAC) 200-6556 28 Ave NW Edmonton, Alberta m.me/ampacinfo Faisal Khan Suri Call (780) 288-8299 admin@ampac.ca
The Alberta Muslim Public Affairs Council (AMPAC) is an independent and non-profit organization that champions active Citizenship, Multicultural-cooperation and Civic Engagement in Alberta’s Muslim communities. AMPAC’s two focus area’s are:
-Community support and engagement – Providing assistance and support to Alberta Muslim organizations with their philanthropic mandates.
- Political activism and advocacy - Advocating the government on behalf of Alberta’s Muslim community and promoting human rights and civil liberties.
---------- Original message ---------- From: Justice Minister <JUSTMIN@novascotia.ca> Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 14:35:48 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: [PROBABLE-SPAM] A Deja Vu for Brian Hodgson and his very corrupt RCMP cohorts 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.
Alberta Law Enforcement Response Teams Published on Apr 22, 2014 Fort McMurray...A Fort McMurray Public School District a teacher's assistant has been arrested and charged with a range of child exploitation offences following an Alberta Law Enforcement Response Teams (ALERT) investigation.
Russell Hancock, 35, was arrested on April 18th by ALERT's Northern Alberta Child Exploitation (ICE) team with the assistance of Wood Buffalo Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit (CFSEU) and Wood Buffalo RCMP detachment members. mike.lokken@albertaicenorth.ca 780-907-8638
From: Brian Hodgson Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 3:57 PM To: mailto:david.raymond.amos@gmail.com Subject: Your Telephone Call to Ft McMurray Constituency Office Monday 15th December 2014
David,
Please ring me regarding the captioned.
Many thanks.
Brian
Brian Hodgson Sergeant-at-Arms & Director, Visitor, Ceremonial and Security Services
The Rantings of Violent David Amos! by baconfatreport on December 14, 2014
David Amos e mailed myself and the Edmonton Police Service to tell them that it appeared Mayor Iveson and Chief of Police Rod Knecht would be pleased that David Amos and myself would “kill each other,” come Monday morning. Now little David Amos isn’t a threat to anyone. First of all David Amos, and his siblings are the product of drunken incestuous sexual congress. David Amos has the attention span of a gnat. Little David is dyslexic, and devoid of the requisite mental and financial capacity to rise to the purchase of an air fare and actually find Edmonton Alberta on the best day he ever had.
David Amos is so pathetic he had his brother Dale Amos come to Edmonton, late last summer video my apartment building, go to my local bar, masturbate outside our window, and claim, “he was gonna get me!” David Amos lives in Halifax, in maritime kanada that’s sort of behavior is considered normal.
Here is an example of what he calls his work!
From: David Amos >> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 20:33:55 -0300 >> Subject: Attn Don Marshall we just talked. Meet Barry Winters and Dean >> Roger Ray and my friends Robin Reid and Werner Bock >> To: don.marshall@edmonton.ca, Barry Winters , dean >> Ray >> Cc: webo , Robin Reid >> >> Good Day Sir >> >> As I said I was grateful for your call but very confused as to why you >> were playing dumb and yet in the end only wanted to know my >> whereabouts at the moment. Trust that even the RCMP and the FBI are >> confused about that most of the time for good reason. As you will soon >> see it is for good reason I might add. >> >> Clearly I got back to you as soon as I checked you out to see if you >> were for real. Your name was not on the roster with the other lawyers >> that I called yesterday. thus i felt you were just another corrupt cop >> playing me and picking my brain especially when you did not wish to >> look on the Internet to verify what i was saying was true. I am >> certain you would understand why I was confused as to why you would >> know the number to call me but not bother to read my emails first. >> Hard telling not knowing but perhaps the other lawyers etc did not >> give my emails to you because they are quite simply pure hell in a >> handbasket for any lawyer or cop to receive to say the least. >> >> Please check my work closely and do your job. I am certain we can >> settle for chump change out of court and public view as long as a >> little justice is finally served upon some bad acting characters ASAP. >> >> This what happened to Robin Reid in your city years ago. that “Barry >> Winters” supports his malicious slander with. As a witness to a crime >> Alberta locks her up to shut her up and fails to properly prosecute a >> killer? Go figure? >> >> http://
David Amos wants “chump change” but alas David Amos is a chump!
Come Monday It’ll Be All Right. Come Monday I’ll Be Holding You Tight by baconfatreport on December 14, 2014
There’s a very old Jimmy Buffet song That goes. “Come Monday, it’ll be all right, come Monday I’ll be holding you tight!” My old and “dear friend” David Amos sent this to myself and the Edmonton Police Service.
Yo Mr Baconfat I just called and tried to explain your blog to Dave Lazzarino (780-721-5357) Staff Sgt. Bill Clark (780)886-7478 and a very nasty Cst Leaman of the EPS and they quite simply didn’t give a damn December 13, 2014 2:05 PM
From: David Amos
To: sunrayzulu; david lazzarino; Dave.Donley; bill clark; dave.loken; scott.macrae; Mike.Lokken; greg.preston; mike lokken; Glen Canning; Show more…Jonathan.Denis; justmin; stephen.horsman; oldmaison; pamela roth; lgunter; joshua.skurnik; Tony Simioni Cc: David Amos; don.iveson; Maurice Brodeuri; brad doucette; admin@epaboard.ca; tim cleveley and a cast of thousands
It certainly appears to me that the cops hope one of us will kill the other EH?
We shall see about that come Monday morning if that is true EH Mayor Iveson and Tony Simioni? END QUOTE
It seems that yesterday my “old and dear friend” David Amos has again been “burning up the phone lines” from his “home” in Halifax to the Edmonton Police Service to complain again for the one thousandth time ad nauseam about, this humble blog! Now my “old and dear friend” David Amos of Halifax has been whining, carping, complaining, commiserating, wailing and gnashing his teeth complaining about me, my “nasty wife,” my blog, and “nasty Naz” the man that owns our favourite pub Teddy’s. It seems rather “off” that someone would call the publican who owns your local and favourite tavern to whine about you, but it’s a free country, right!
My “dear friend” David Amos has sent quite literally hundreds of thousands of spam e mailings in mass orgasmic ejaculations to politicians, police authorities, commanding officers of Canadian Forces units, SEAL TEAM Six, the FBI. the US Marshall’s Service, Prime Minister Harper, the CEO of the company that employs my wife, the President of these United States of Amerka Barak Hussein Obama, and a cast of thousands more, all complaining about me, my “nasty wife,” and this humble blog. I am sooo proud!
I would admonish my “old and dear friend,” little David Amos of Halifax. That if he doesn’t enjoy the humble offerings on this blog for oh so many, many years, to refrain from habitually visiting the blog, and reading it. It seems to me, “my old and dear friend” David Amos’ many thousands cyberspace victims of his relentless trolling and spam would also encourage him to cease and desist befouling their e mail boxes, and wasting their time with insanely ranting, and unpleasant telephone calls.
It seems in some quarters of the EPS that my “old and dear friend” David Amos has or may have become unhinged. He has made what, some are now calling threats, and discrete inquires about my and my wife’s well-being, and safety were made late last evening. Let me reassure all in cyberspace and the Edmonton Police Service that my “old and dear friend,” David Amos is no more unhinged now, than he’s ever been.
Late last Summer David had his brother Dale come to Edmonton from Ft. Mac Murray to conduct surveillance on our home, take video pictures which he posted in cyberspace, and claim he was “a gonna get me, not now but soon.” My “old and dear friend” has threatened me for many years with “coming to Edmonton, and giving me the shit kicking I so richly deserve.” Little David has also promised that “he, his brother Dale, and his nephew were coming to get myself, and Pat Doran of Calgary.
My “old and dear friend” little David Amos has threatened to “deal with me with his Dan Wesson Gun that shoots real good,” in e mails over the years. Now that indeed is impossible because there’s no way the RCMP would permit one as unhinged, as David Amos to have firearms. That indeed begs the question: Is my “old and dear friend” David Amos and his “family” on any agency’s watch list anywhere?
So David Amos and his brother Dale Amos are no more a threat, or clear and present danger to myself or anyone than they’ve ever been. My “old and dear friend” has not now or ever been able to rise to the purchase of a ticket on “the hound” or an air fare, even find Edmonton Alberta on the best day he ever had. So all this folderol is nothing more insidious, than more of “my old and dear friend” David Amos’ insane pathetic bombast. Much like how David Amos has threatened all his cyberspace “friends” with litigation for so many years.
So to the Edmonton Police Service, who I doubt actually read this humble blog, “come Monday I’ll be all right.” And I really don’t think Chief Knecht and Tony Simioni are “suppurating syphilitic warts…
Naw, of course I do!
What’s that delightfully stupid expression you say to everyone David? “C’yall in court!”
You Liked It The First Time David, Why Not Again by baconfatreport on December 14, 2014
Saturday, July 26, 2014 IDF Must Keep Killing HAMAS and the “palestinians” They Hide Behind!
“Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war.” It is not in the best interests, safety of Eretz Yisrael, its people or all the Jews of the Diaspora to cease the war against HAMAS. So called “palestinians” are being killed entirely because HAMAS uses them as human shields, or what they call shahids. Eretz Yisrael must finish off HAMAS notwithstanding the vexation of John Kerry or President monkey boy Obama. Gaza must be rid of HAMAS and de-militarized before hostilities can cease. HAMAS’ tunnels must be destroyed. Moshavniks and Kibbutzniks in southern Israel now know HAMAs with its tunnels planned and attempted to massacre them. The government of Eretz Yisrael must protect its people, save their lives and kill of the military wing of HAMAS.
The “world” permitted the extermination of six million Jews not so long ago. The Secretary General of the Arab League in 1948 called for a “war of great slaughter, and extermination of the Jews,” when the United Nations terminated the British Mandate in Palestine, and attempted to create the first “two state solution.” The Trans Arab Nation obviously rejected that idea, then and now. The “world” didn’t and doesn’t care. Monkey boy Barak Hussein Obama and his cock sucker John Kerry doesn’t care about Jews, or Jewish lives, or citizens of Eretz Yisrael. Hell, even Calgary’s Muslim Mayor Naheed Nenshi or his anti-Semite chief police Ric Hansen don’t give a fuck about the lives, safety and property of the “damned Jews” of Calgary.
No one cares about Jewish lives anywhere on the planet save the government and the fighting Jews of Eretz Yisrael. Hence, that is why IDF must, for the continued survival of Jews everywhere finish the job, and kill off HAMAS, not withstanding the loud and anti-Semitic vexation of “diplomats” in Europe and the Arab World. The United Nations organization UNRW actually hides rockets and munitions for HAMAS. They have been caught.
There is nothing new here. The world, “kristian” and Muslim has been killing Jews for millennia. The “world” and amerka is permitting Arabs to do the same now. The only thing that’s different is, these Jews fight. These Jews will NOT climb aboard the “cattle cars.” Israelis to the chagrin of Monkey boy Obama and John Kerry will not be exterminated quietly.
That is why IDF must resume hostilities after this humanitarian pause, and ensure their own safety, and the safety of this “bolt hole” for all the Jews on the planet.
Kill em all and let Hashem sort em out! Not withstanding “the world” we want to live!
So does Freddy have trouble dealing with simple truths? If so please sue me. It will save a Proud Maritimer the cost of filing against Alberta. I promise I won't file a motion to dismiss but look out for one hell of a counterclaim. (Ask former Premier Danny Williams about such things)
An Alberta provincial election has been called and with the dissolution of the 27th Legislature there are no Members of the Legislative Assembly until the results of the general election become official. Following the election, biographical information of returning and newly-elected Members will be posted as it becomes available. During the election period, constituency offices will remain open to serve the public.
> From: Edmonton.Rutherford@assembly.ab.ca > To: zorroboy2009@hotmail.com > Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 08:45:19 -0600 > Subject: RE: Getting things right puts me why ahead of you and your lawyer > buddies and Tommy Boy Lukaszuk too EH Mr Baconfat? > > > > PLEASE – Take this email address OFF your spam list or we will be contacting > the Sargeant at Arms to report these abusive messages.
---------- Original message ---------- From: Pamela Palmater <ppalmater@politics.ryerson.ca> Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 23:55:10 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: Faisal Khan Suri would not listen to me so perhaps his political friends or the cops can explain my concerns To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Kwe, Tansi, She:kon, Hello;
I will be in and out of the office/province on business and research travel over the coming weeks and may not be able to get to your email right away.
It may be helpful to send a reminder if your matter is urgent and/or put the nature of the request in the subject heading.
Welal'in, Ekosi, Nia:wen, Thank you.
Pam
Dr. Pamela D. Palmater Chair in Indigenous Governance Ryerson University
---------- Original message ---------- From: "Fine, Sean"<SFine@globeandmail.com> Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 23:55:10 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: Faisal Khan Suri would not listen to me so perhaps his political friends or the cops can explain my concerns To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
?I am in a place far removed from reality, from June 1 to June 8. On my return, I promise to be kinder.
---------- Original message ---------- From: Iqra.Khalid@parl.gc.ca Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 17:52:56 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: Faisal Khan Suri would not listen to me so perhaps his political friends or the cops can explain my concerns To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
Thank you for contacting the office of MP Iqra Khalid. Your email is very important to us and we will respond to you as soon as possible.
If your matter is urgent, please call our office at 905-820-8814 for Mississauga, or 613-995-7321, for Ottawa.
If your email is pertaining to any immigration matter or a service Canada issue, our Community Office will be very happy to assist you. Please feel free to walk in the office during the weekdays from 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM (we break for lunch from 1-2 PM).
The Community Office address for the residents of Mississauga - Erin Mills is as follows :
Community Office of Iqra Khalid, MP 3100 Ridgeway Drive Suite 35 Mississauga, Ontario L5L 5M5 Phone : 9058208814 Fax : 9058204068
We look forward to serving you.
---------- Original message ---------- From: Newsroom <newsroom@globeandmail.com> Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 23:55:11 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: Faisal Khan Suri would not listen to me so perhaps his political friends or the cops can explain my concerns To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank you for contacting The Globe and Mail.
If your matter pertains to newspaper delivery or you require technical support, please contact our Customer Service department at 1-800-387-5400 or send an email to customerservice@globeandmail.com
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Randy.Boissonnault@parl.gc.ca Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 17:52:56 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: Faisal Khan Suri would not listen to me so perhaps his political friends or the cops can explain my concerns To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
Hello,
Thank you for writing to my office. I value hearing from Edmonton Centre constituents and stakeholders. Your email will be read. My team and I will be happy to respond.
This email is an automatic response to let you know that your correspondence has been received. Please do not reply.
As we prioritize responding first to residents of Edmonton Centre, please provide your postal code, if you have not done so already.
Should you need it, this link will help you confirm who your Member of Parliament is: https://bit.ly/1BgbGyd.
I will reply as soon as possible whether your issue pertains to you personally or if you have written to me on a matter related to my LGBTQ2 responsibilities or other legislative duties.
If another government department or Member of Parliament can better address your inquiry, we will forward your email to the appropriate office and invite them to respond to you.
Thank you again for writing to me.
Kind regards,
Randy Boissonnault Member of Parliament for Edmonton Centre Special Advisor to the Prime Minister on LGBTQ2 Issues
Merci d'avoir ?crit ? mon bureau. J'appr?cie lire les ?lecteurs et les intervenants d'Edmonton-Centre. Votre courriel sera lu et mon ?quipe et moi serons heureux d'y r?pondre.
Ce courriel est une r?ponse automatique pour vous faire savoir que votre correspondance a bien ?t? re?ue. S'il vous pla?t ne r?pondez pas.
?tant donn? que nous donnons priorit? aux r?sidents d'Edmonton-Centre, s'il-vous-pla?t veuillez nous fournir votre code postal si vous ne l'avez pas d?j? fait.
Au besoin, le lien suivant vous aidera ? confirmer qui est votre d?put?: https://bit.ly/1CyAl50 .
Je vous r?pondrai d?s que possible si votre enjeux vous concerne personnellement ou si vous m'avez ?crit sur une question li?e ? mes responsabilit?s sur les enjeux LGBTQ2 ou ? d'autres t?ches l?gislatives.
Si un autre service gouvernemental ou un autre membre du Parlement est dans une meilleure position pour r?pondre ? votre demande, nous transmettrons votre courriel au bureau appropri? et les inviterons ? vous r?pondre.
Merci encore de m'avoir ?crit.
Cordialement,
Randy Boissonnault D?put? d'Edmonton-Centre Conseiller sp?cial du premier ministre sur les enjeux LGBTQ2
On 6/2/19, David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> ---------- Original message ---------- >> From: "Hon.Ralph.Goodale (PS/SP)"<Hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca> >> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 17:50:29 +0000 >> Subject: Automatic reply: The Honourable Thomas Albert Cromwell can >> never deny that I tried to inform him of what the RCMP, the CBC and >> his latest client Jody Wilson-Raybould knows Correct Mr Butts? >> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> >> >> Merci d'avoir ?crit ? l'honorable Ralph Goodale, ministre de la >> S?curit? publique et de la Protection civile. >> En raison d'une augmentation importante du volume de la correspondance >> adress?e au ministre, veuillez prendre note qu'il pourrait y avoir un >> retard dans le traitement de votre courriel. Soyez assur? que votre >> message sera examin? avec attention. >> Merci! >> L'Unit? de la correspondance minist?rielle >> S?curit? publique Canada >> ********* >> >> Thank you for writing to the Honourable Ralph Goodale, Minister of >> Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness. >> Due to the significant increase in the volume of correspondence >> addressed to the Minister, please note there could be a delay in >> processing your email. Rest assured that your message will be >> carefully reviewed. >> Thank you! >> Ministerial Correspondence Unit >> Public Safety Canada >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Randy.Boissonnault@parl.gc.ca >> Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 15:57:12 +0000 >> Subject: Automatic reply: Yo Minister Qualtrough RE "Litigation Lmbo" >> Please enjoy an email that you and your fellow members of the PCO >> ignored for way past too long >> To: motomaniac333@gmail.com >> >> Hello, >> >> Thank you for writing to my office. I value hearing from Edmonton >> Centre constituents and stakeholders. Your email will be read. My team >> and I will be happy to respond. >> >> This email is an automatic response to let you know that your >> correspondence has been received. Please do not reply. >> >> As we prioritize responding first to residents of Edmonton Centre, >> please provide your postal code, if you have not done so already. >> >> Should you need it, this link will help you confirm who your Member of >> Parliament is: https://bit.ly/1BgbGyd. >> >> I will reply as soon as possible whether your issue pertains to you >> personally or if you have written to me on a matter related to my >> LGBTQ2 responsibilities or other legislative duties. >> >> If another government department or Member of Parliament can better >> address your inquiry, we will forward your email to the appropriate >> office and invite them to respond to you. >> >> Thank you again for writing to me. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Randy Boissonnault >> Member of Parliament for Edmonton Centre >> Special Advisor to the Prime Minister on LGBTQ2 Issues >> >> E-mail: >> randy.boissonnault@parl.gc.ca<mailto:randy.boissonnault@parl.gc.ca> >> Website: http://rboissonnault.liberal.ca/ >> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/R.Boissonnault >> Twitter and Instagram: @R_Boissonnault >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> Bonjour, >> >> Merci d'avoir ?crit ? mon bureau. J'appr?cie lire les ?lecteurs et les >> intervenants d'Edmonton-Centre. Votre courriel sera lu et mon ?quipe >> et moi serons heureux d'y r?pondre. >> >> Ce courriel est une r?ponse automatique pour vous faire savoir que >> votre correspondance a bien ?t? re?ue. S'il vous pla?t ne r?pondez >> pas. >> >> ?tant donn? que nous donnons priorit? aux r?sidents d'Edmonton-Centre, >> s'il-vous-pla?t veuillez nous fournir votre code postal si vous ne >> l'avez pas d?j? fait. >> >> Au besoin, le lien suivant vous aidera ? confirmer qui est votre >> d?put?: https://bit.ly/1CyAl50 . >> >> Je vous r?pondrai d?s que possible si votre enjeux vous concerne >> personnellement ou si vous m'avez ?crit sur une question li?e ? mes >> responsabilit?s sur les enjeux LGBTQ2 ou ? d'autres t?ches >> l?gislatives. >> >> Si un autre service gouvernemental ou un autre membre du Parlement est >> dans une meilleure position pour r?pondre ? votre demande, nous >> transmettrons votre courriel au bureau appropri? et les inviterons ? >> vous r?pondre. >> >> Merci encore de m'avoir ?crit. >> >> Cordialement, >> >> Randy Boissonnault >> D?put? d'Edmonton-Centre >> Conseiller sp?cial du premier ministre sur les enjeux LGBTQ2 >> >> >> E-mail: >> randy.boissonnault@parl.gc.ca<mailto:randy.boissonnault@parl.gc.ca> >> Site internet: http://rboissonnault.liberal.ca/ >> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/R.Boissonnault >> Twitter et Instagram: @R_Boissonnault >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Michael Cohen <mcohen@trumporg.com> >> Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2018 05:54:40 +0000 >> Subject: Automatic reply: ATTN Blair Armitage You acted as the Usher >> of the Black Rod twice while Kevin Vickers was the Sergeant-at-Arms >> Hence you and the RCMP must know why I sued the Queen Correct? >> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> >> >> Effective January 20, 2017, I have accepted the role as personal >> counsel to President Donald J. Trump. All future emails should be >> directed to mdcohen212@gmail.com and all future calls should be >> directed to 646-853-0114. >> ________________________________ >> This communication is from The Trump Organization or an affiliate >> thereof and is not sent on behalf of any other individual or entity. >> This email may contain information that is confidential and/or >> proprietary. Such information may not be read, disclosed, used, >> copied, distributed or disseminated except (1) for use by the intended >> recipient or (2) as expressly authorized by the sender. If you have >> received this communication in error, please immediately delete it and >> promptly notify the sender. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed >> to be received, secure or error-free as emails could be intercepted, >> corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late, incomplete, contain viruses >> or otherwise. The Trump Organization and its affiliates do not >> guarantee that all emails will be read and do not accept liability for >> any errors or omissions in emails. Any views or opinions presented in >> any email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily >> represent those of The Trump Organization or any of its affiliates. >> Nothing in this communication is intended to operate as an electronic >> signature under applicable law. >> >> >> >> ---------- 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 >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: "Eidt, David (OAG/CPG)"<David.Eidt@gnb.ca> >> Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 00:33:21 +0000 >> Subject: Automatic reply: Yo Mr Lutz howcome your buddy the clerk >> would not file this motion and properly witnessed affidavit and why >> did she take all four copies? >> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> >> >> I will be out of the office until Monday, March 13, 2017. I will have >> little to no access to email. Please dial 453-2222 for assistance. >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Marc Richard <MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca> >> Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2016 13:16:46 +0000 >> Subject: Automatic reply: RE: The New Brunswick Real Estate >> Association and their deliberate ignorance for the bankster's benefit >> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com> >> >> I will be out of the office until August 15, 2016. Je serai absent du >> bureau jusqu'au 15 août 2016. >> >> >> >> >> >>> ---------- 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.gc.ca/IndexingQueries/infp_RE_info_e.php?court_no=T-1557-15&select_court=T >>> >>> These are digital recordings of the last three hearings >>> >>> Dec 14th https://archive.org/details/BahHumbug >>> >>> January 11th, 2016 https://archive.org/details/Jan11th2015 >>> >>> April 3rd, 2017 >>> >>> https://archive.org/details/April32017JusticeLeblancHearing >>> >>> >>> This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal >>> >>> http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.gc.ca/IndexingQueries/infp_RE_info_e.php?court_no=A-48-16&select_court=All >>> >>> >>> The only hearing thus far >>> >>> May 24th, 2017 >>> >>> https://archive.org/details/May24thHoedown >>> >>> >>> 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.blogspot.ca/2015/09/v-behaviorurldefaultvmlo.html >>> >>> >>> 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.Foran@gnb.ca, >>> 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 >>> >> >> >> 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.blogspot.ca/2013/10/re-glen-greenwald-and-braz >>> ilian.html >>> >>>> http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/06/09/nsa-leak-guardian.html >>>> >>>> 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?v=vugUalUO8YY >>>> >>>> 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/ITriedToExplainItToAllMaritimersInEarly200 >>>> 6 >>>> >>>> http://davidamos.blogspot.ca/2006/05/wiretap-tapes-impeach-bush.html >>>> >>>> http://www.archive.org/details/PoliceSurveilanceWiretapTape139 >>>> >>>> http://archive.org/details/Part1WiretapTape143 >>>> >>>> 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.blogspot.ca/2017/11/federal-court-of-appeal-finally-makes.html >> >> >> 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.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/236679/index.do >> >> >> 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 cannot be said that the judge is disqualified. >> >> >> 28 The point can rightly be made that had Mr. Patterson been >> asked to represent the appellant as counsel before his appointment to >> the bench, the conflict rules would likely have prevented him from >> taking the case because his firm had formerly represented one of the >> defendants in the case. Thus, it is argued how is it that as a trial >> judge Patterson J. can hear the case? This issue was considered by the >> Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in Locabail (U.K.) Ltd. v. Bayfield >> Properties Ltd., [2000] Q.B. 451. The court held, at para. 58, that >> there is no inflexible rule governing the disqualification of a judge >> and that, "[e]verything depends on the circumstances." >> >> >> 29 It seems to me that what appears at first sight to be an >> inconsistency in application of rules can be explained by the >> different contexts and in particular, the strong presumption of >> judicial impartiality that applies in the context of disqualification >> of a judge. There is no such presumption in cases of allegations of >> conflict of interest against a lawyer because of a firm's previous >> involvement in the case. To the contrary, as explained by Sopinka J. >> in MacDonald Estate v. Martin (1990), 77 D.L.R. (4th) 249 (S.C.C.), >> for sound policy reasons there is a presumption of a disqualifying >> interest that can rarely be overcome. In particular, a conclusory >> statement from the lawyer that he or she had no confidential >> information about the case will never be sufficient. The case is the >> opposite where the allegation of bias is made against a trial judge. >> His or her statement that he or she knew nothing about the case and >> had no involvement in it will ordinarily be accepted at face value >> unless there is good reason to doubt it: see Locabail, at para. 19. >> >> >> 30 That brings me then to consider the particular circumstances >> of this case and whether there are serious grounds to find a >> disqualifying conflict of interest in this case. In my view, there are >> two significant factors that justify the trial judge's decision not to >> recuse himself. The first is his statement, which all parties accept, >> that he knew nothing of the case when it was in his former firm and >> that he had nothing to do with it. The second is the long passage of >> time. As was said in Wewaykum, at para. 85: >> To us, one significant factor stands out, and must inform >> the perspective of the reasonable person assessing the impact of this >> involvement on Binnie J.'s impartiality in the appeals. That factor is >> the passage of time. Most arguments for disqualification rest on >> circumstances that are either contemporaneous to the decision-making, >> or that occurred within a short time prior to the decision-making. >> 31 There are other factors that inform the issue. The Wilson >> Walker firm no longer acted for any of the parties by the time of >> trial. More importantly, at the time of the motion, Patterson J. had >> been a judge for six years and thus had not had a relationship with >> his former firm for a considerable period of time. >> >> >> 32 In my view, a reasonable person, viewing the matter >> realistically would conclude that the trial judge could deal fairly >> and impartially with this case. I take this view principally because >> of the long passage of time and the trial judge's lack of involvement >> in or knowledge of the case when the Wilson Walker firm had carriage. >> In these circumstances it cannot be reasonably contended that the >> trial judge could not remain impartial in the case. The mere fact that >> his name appears on the letterhead of some correspondence from over a >> decade ago would not lead a reasonable person to believe that he would >> either consciously or unconsciously favour his former firm's former >> client. It is simply not realistic to think that a judge would throw >> off his mantle of impartiality, ignore his oath of office and favour a >> client - about whom he knew nothing - of a firm that he left six years >> earlier and that no longer acts for the client, in a case involving >> events from over a decade ago. >> (emphasis added) >> >> [19] Justice Webb had no involvement with any matter >> involving Mr. Amos while he was a member of Patterson Palmer or >> Patterson Law, nor does Mr. Amos suggest that he did. Mr. Amos made it >> clear during the hearing of this matter that the only reason for the >> alleged conflict for Justice Webb was that he was a member of >> Patterson Law and Patterson Palmer. This is simply not enough for >> Justice Webb to be disqualified. Any involvement of Mr. Amos with >> Patterson Law while Justice Webb was a member of that firm would have >> had to occur over 10 years ago and even longer for the time when he >> was a member of Patterson Palmer. In addition to the lack of any >> involvement on his part with any matter or dispute that Mr. Amos had >> with Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer (which in and of itself is >> sufficient to dispose of this matter), the length of time since >> Justice Webb was a member of Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer would >> also result in the same finding – that there is no conflict in Justice >> Webb hearing this appeal. >> >> [20] Similarly in R. v. Bagot, 2000 MBCA 30, 145 Man. R. >> (2d) 260, the Manitoba Court of Appeal found that there was no >> reasonable apprehension of bias when a judge, who had been a member of >> the law firm that had been retained by the accused, had no involvement >> with the accused while he was a lawyer with that firm. >> >> [21] In Del Zotto v. Minister of National Revenue, [2000] 4 >> F.C. 321, 257 N.R. 96, this court did find that there would be a >> reasonable apprehension of bias where a judge, who while he was a >> lawyer, had recorded time on a matter involving the same person who >> was before that judge. However, this case can be distinguished as >> Justice Webb did not have any time recorded on any files involving Mr. >> Amos while he was a lawyer with Patterson Palmer or Patterson Law. >> >> [22] Mr. Amos also included with his submissions a CD. He >> stated in his affidavit dated June 26, 2017 that there is a “true copy >> of an American police surveillance wiretap entitled 139” on this CD. >> He has also indicated that he has “provided a true copy of the CD >> entitled 139 to many American and Canadian law enforcement authorities >> and not one of the police forces or officers of the court are willing >> to investigate it”. Since he has indicated that this is an “American >> police surveillance wiretap”, this is a matter for the American law >> enforcement authorities and cannot create, as Mr. Amos suggests, a >> conflict of interest for any judge to whom he provides a copy. >> >> [23] As a result, there is no conflict or reasonable >> apprehension of bias for Justice Webb and therefore, no reason for him >> to recuse himself. >> >> [24] Mr. Amos alleged that Justice Near’s past professional >> experience with the government created a “quasi-conflict” in deciding >> the cross-appeal. Mr. Amos provided no details and Justice Near >> confirmed that he had no prior knowledge of the matters alleged in the >> Claim. Justice Near sees no reason to recuse himself. >> >> [25] Insofar as it is possible to glean the basis for Mr. >> Amos’ allegations against Justice Gleason, it appears that he alleges >> that she is incapable of hearing this appeal because he says he wrote >> a letter to Brian Mulroney and Jean Chrétien in 2004. At that time, >> both Justice Gleason and Mr. Mulroney were partners in the law firm >> Ogilvy Renault, LLP. The letter in question, which is rude and angry, >> begins with “Hey you two Evil Old Smiling Bastards” and “Re: me suing >> you and your little dogs too”. There is no indication that the letter >> was ever responded to or that a law suit was ever commenced by Mr. >> Amos against Mr. Mulroney. In the circumstances, there is no reason >> for Justice Gleason to recuse herself as the letter in question does >> not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. >> >> >> III. Issue >> >> [26] The issue on the cross-appeal is as follows: Did the >> Judge err in setting aside the Prothonotary’s Order striking the Claim >> in its entirety without leave to amend and in determining that Mr. >> Amos’ allegation that the RCMP barred him from the New Brunswick >> legislature in 2004 was capable of supporting a cause of action? >> >> IV. Analysis >> >> A. Standard of Review >> >> [27] Following the Judge’s decision to set aside the >> Prothonotary’s Order, this Court revisited the standard of review to >> be applied to discretionary decisions of prothonotaries and decisions >> made by judges on appeals of prothonotaries’ decisions in Hospira >> Healthcare Corp. v. Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, 2016 FCA 215, >> 402 D.L.R. (4th) 497 [Hospira]. In Hospira, a five-member panel of >> this Court replaced the Aqua-Gem standard of review with that >> articulated in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235 >> [Housen]. As a result, it is no longer appropriate for the Federal >> Court to conduct a de novo review of a discretionary order made by a >> prothonotary in regard to questions vital to the final issue of the >> case. Rather, a Federal Court judge can only intervene on appeal if >> the prothonotary made an error of law or a palpable and overriding >> error in determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and >> law (Hospira at para. 79). Further, this Court can only interfere with >> a Federal Court judge’s review of a prothonotary’s discretionary order >> if the judge made an error of law or palpable and overriding error in >> determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and law >> (Hospira at paras. 82-83). >> >> [28] In the case at bar, the Judge substituted his own >> assessment of Mr. Amos’ Claim for that of the Prothonotary. This Court >> must look to the Prothonotary’s Order to determine whether the Judge >> erred in law or made a palpable and overriding error in choosing to >> interfere. >> >> >> B. Did the Judge err in interfering with the >> Prothonotary’s Order? >> >> [29] The Prothontoary’s Order accepted the following >> paragraphs from the Crown’s submissions as the basis for striking the >> Claim in its entirety without leave to amend: >> >> 17. Within the 96 paragraph Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff >> addresses his complaint in paragraphs 14-24, inclusive. All but four >> of those paragraphs are dedicated to an incident that occurred in 2006 >> in and around the legislature in New Brunswick. The jurisdiction of >> the Federal Court does not extend to Her Majesty the Queen in right of >> the Provinces. In any event, the Plaintiff hasn’t named the Province >> or provincial actors as parties to this action. The incident alleged >> does not give rise to a justiciable cause of action in this Court. >> (…) >> >> >> 21. The few paragraphs that directly address the Defendant >> provide no details as to the individuals involved or the location of >> the alleged incidents or other details sufficient to allow the >> Defendant to respond. As a result, it is difficult or impossible to >> determine the causes of action the Plaintiff is attempting to advance. >> A generous reading of the Statement of Claim allows the Defendant to >> only speculate as to the true and/or intended cause of action. At >> best, the Plaintiff’s action may possibly be summarized as: he >> suspects he is barred from the House of Commons. >> [footnotes omitted]. >> >> >> [30] The Judge determined that he could not strike the Claim >> on the same jurisdictional basis as the Prothonotary. The Judge noted >> that the Federal Court has jurisdiction over claims based on the >> liability of Federal Crown servants like the RCMP and that the actors >> who barred Mr. Amos from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 >> included the RCMP (Federal Court Judgment at para. 23). In considering >> the viability of these allegations de novo, the Judge identified >> paragraph 14 of the Claim as containing “some precision” as it >> identifies the date of the event and a RCMP officer acting as >> Aide-de-Camp to the Lieutenant Governor (Federal Court Judgment at >> para. 27). >> >> >> [31] The Judge noted that the 2004 event could support a >> cause of action in the tort of misfeasance in public office and >> identified the elements of the tort as excerpted from Meigs v. Canada, >> 2013 FC 389, 431 F.T.R. 111: >> >> >> [13] As in both the cases of Odhavji Estate v Woodhouse, 2003 SCC >> 69 [Odhavji] and Lewis v Canada, 2012 FC 1514 [Lewis], I must >> determine whether the plaintiffs’ statement of claim pleads each >> element of the alleged tort of misfeasance in public office: >> >> a) The public officer must have engaged in deliberate and unlawful >> conduct in his or her capacity as public officer; >> >> b) The public officer must have been aware both that his or her >> conduct was unlawful and that it was likely to harm the plaintiff; and >> >> c) There must be an element of bad faith or dishonesty by the public >> officer and knowledge of harm alone is insufficient to conclude that a >> public officer acted in bad faith or dishonestly. >> Odhavji, above, at paras 23, 24 and 28 >> (Federal Court Judgment at para. 28). >> >> [32] The Judge determined that Mr. Amos disclosed sufficient >> material facts to meet the elements of the tort of misfeasance in >> public office because the actors, who barred him from the New >> Brunswick legislature in 2004, including the RCMP, did so for >> “political reasons” (Federal Court Judgment at para. 29). >> >> [33] This Court’s discussion of the sufficiency of pleadings >> in Merchant Law Group v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2010 FCA 184, 321 >> D.L.R (4th) 301 is particularly apt: >> >> …When pleading bad faith or abuse of power, it is not enough to >> assert, baldly, conclusory phrases such as “deliberately or >> negligently,” “callous disregard,” or “by fraud and theft did steal”. >> “The bare assertion of a conclusion upon which the court is called >> upon to pronounce is not an allegation of material fact”. Making bald, >> conclusory allegations without any evidentiary foundation is an abuse >> of process… >> >> To this, I would add that the tort of misfeasance in public office >> requires a particular state of mind of a public officer in carrying >> out the impunged action, i.e., deliberate conduct which the public >> officer knows to be inconsistent with the obligations of his or her >> office. For this tort, particularization of the allegations is >> mandatory. Rule 181 specifically requires particularization of >> allegations of “breach of trust,” “wilful default,” “state of mind of >> a person,” “malice” or “fraudulent intention.” >> (at paras. 34-35, citations omitted). >> >> [34] Applying the Housen standard of review to the >> Prothonotary’s Order, we are of the view that the Judge interfered >> absent a legal or palpable and overriding error. >> >> [35] The Prothonotary determined that Mr. Amos’ Claim >> disclosed no reasonable claim and was fundamentally vexatious on the >> basis of jurisdictional concerns and the absence of material facts to >> ground a cause of action. Paragraph 14 of the Claim, which addresses >> the 2004 event, pleads no material facts as to how the RCMP officer >> engaged in deliberate and unlawful conduct, knew that his or her >> conduct was unlawful and likely to harm Mr. Amos, and acted in bad >> faith. While the Claim alleges elsewhere that Mr. Amos was barred from >> the New Brunswick legislature for political and/or malicious reasons, >> these allegations are not particularized and are directed against >> non-federal actors, such as the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Legislative >> Assembly of New Brunswick and the Fredericton Police Force. As such, >> the Judge erred in determining that Mr. Amos’ allegation that the RCMP >> barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 was capable of >> supporting a cause of action. >> >> [36] In our view, the Claim is made up entirely of bare >> allegations, devoid of any detail, such that it discloses no >> reasonable cause of action within the jurisdiction of the Federal >> Courts. Therefore, the Judge erred in interfering to set aside the >> Prothonotary’s Order striking the claim in its entirety. Further, we >> find that the Prothonotary made no error in denying leave to amend. >> The deficiencies in Mr. Amos’ pleadings are so extensive such that >> amendment could not cure them (see Collins at para. 26). >> >> V. Conclusion >> [37] For the foregoing reasons, we would allow the Crown’s >> cross-appeal, with costs, setting aside the Federal Court Judgment, >> dated January 25, 2016 and restoring the Prothonotary’s Order, dated >> November 12, 2015, which struck Mr. Amos’ Claim in its entirety >> without leave to amend. >> "Wyman W. Webb" >> J.A. >> "David G. Near" >> J.A. >> "Mary J.L. Gleason" >> J.A. >> >> >> >> FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL >> NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD >> >> A CROSS-APPEAL FROM AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SOUTHCOTT DATED >> JANUARY 25, 2016; DOCKET NUMBER T-1557-15. >> DOCKET: >> >> A-48-16 >> >> >> >> STYLE OF CAUSE: >> >> DAVID RAYMOND AMOS v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN >> >> >> >> PLACE OF HEARING: >> >> Fredericton, >> New Brunswick >> >> DATE OF HEARING: >> >> May 24, 2017 >> >> REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: >> >> WEBB J.A. >> NEAR J.A. >> GLEASON J.A. >> >> DATED: >> >> October 30, 2017 >> >> APPEARANCES: >> David Raymond Amos >> >> >> For The Appellant / respondent on cross-appeal >> (on his own behalf) >> >> Jan Jensen >> >> >> For The Respondent / appELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL >> >> SOLICITORS OF RECORD: >> Nathalie G. Drouin >> Deputy Attorney General of Canada >> >> For The Respondent / APPELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL >> >
'Defence without being defensive': Scheer tries to blunt attack lines on racism, deficits
Scheer moves to rob the Liberals of their best rhetorical weapons - but there's still Doug Ford
Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer rises during question period in the House of Commons, Monday, May 27, 2019 in Ottawa. (Adrian Wyld/THE CANADIAN PRESS)
On Tuesday, in a banquet hall in North York, Andrew Scheer used a speech on immigration policy to do something no other leader of a mainstream party will have to do during this election cycle: stand in front of the TV cameras and assure the country his party isn't racist.
"I find the notion that one's race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation would make them in any way superior to anybody else absolutely repugnant," Scheer told the crowd at the party-organized event. "And if there's anyone who disagrees with that, there's the door."
The Liberals have been loudly suggesting that the door Scheer pointed to is a revolving one between the Conservative Party and extremists. So this was something Scheer had to do.
One Conservative insider described the approach as, "a little bit of defence without being defensive." ("Hey, it got the Raptors to the finals," he added.)
The idea was to speak directly to a Liberal attack line, though that rebuttal was weakened when — on the same day Scheer was delivering his speech — a Conservative MP quoted New Zealand's worst mass killer to attack a Muslim witness's credibility before the Commons standing committee on justice and human rights.
Scheer's immigration speech followed the same strategy he employed in rolling back his earlier promise to balance the federal budget within two years, by pushing the timeline out to five years.
The Liberals have been warning Canadians of the dire consequences of the cuts that would be needed to wipe out the deficit in just two years. So Scheer is trying to take two Liberal lines of attack — extremism and austerity — off the table.
"They are trying to replay the last campaign," the Conservative insider said. "Which they are not going to be able to do."
Scheer cheekily blamed Justin Trudeau for forcing him to change his balanced budget promise, insisting the nation's finances after four Liberal budgets are so bad there's no way to responsibly eliminate the deficit in the near term.
The real blame, however, likely rests with Ontario Premier Doug Ford.
The Ford effect
Ford's poll numbers have dropped to stomach-flu levels of popularity in the months since his first budget. His cost-cutting agenda has enraged mayors, unions, teachers and parents of children with autism. Ford's federal cousins are worried about being caught in the blast radius of public outrage in what will be the upcoming election's key battleground.
The blowback to the Ford budget shows that, for federal Conservatives, the recent turnover in provincial legislatures cuts both ways.
Conservative or conservative-leaning governments now hold power from Alberta to Prince Edward Island — something that encourages federal Conservatives to see themselves riding a wave. But being so closely associated with a conflict-prone government like Ford's carries some risk.
Ontario Premier Doug Ford, right, and Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer acknowledge the crowd while on stage at the Conservative national convention in Halifax on Thursday, August 23, 2018. (Darren Calabrese/Canadian Press)
"I think the positives outweigh the potential negatives," the Conservative insider said. "As long as the message gets out, it's going to be okay."
That message, writ large, is that conservative-leaning voters can limit the damage a Trudeau-led government can do to the country by limiting the prime minister to one term. It seems clear that there is a growing audience for that message.
Wooing the 'Blue Liberals'
The SNC Lavalin controversy and a series of self-inflicted wounds have wiped out the Liberals' former lead in the polls. The Conservatives are running TV ads (in heavy rotation during the Raptors' run to the finals) that seek to reinforce voters' growing doubts about Trudeau.
Their primary targets are the so-called Blue Liberals — voters who have supported the governing party but are less comfortable than the prime minister and Finance Minister Bill Morneau are with serial multi-billion-dollar deficits.
Many Conservatives feel the leftward shift of the Liberals under Trudeau has orphaned the bulk of those Blue Liberals. The change in Scheer's balanced budget promise is meant to tell those voters he takes the deficit more seriously than Trudeau does, but won't be reckless about getting rid of it.
If Scheer can woo the Blue Liberals while progressive voters continue to splinter between the Liberals, the NDP and the Greens, it widens his path to power.
The Conservatives are flush with cash. They already have close to 300 candidates nominated and knocking on doors.
Ontario is target-rich for them — especially the GTA. Their Quebec slate of candidates has been bolstered by former mayors. The Prairies are a traditional stronghold and there is nowhere for them to go but up in the Atlantic provinces.
A majority or nothing?
But the vote splits in British Columbia are so fluid and volatile right now that no party can bank on a safe landing.
Conservative insiders concede that simply winning the most seats likely wouldn't be enough to put them in a position to govern — not without a majority, which is something that no party can bank on five months out.
There's a sense that the Greens, and whatever remains of the New Democrats after October, will swallow hard and support the Liberals rather than hand the unused keys of 24 Sussex Drive to Scheer.
So the wooing continues. The TV ad attacks, and the daily assault of question period, work to amplify Canadians' doubts about Trudeau. Policy speeches and policy shifts work to mitigate their doubts about Scheer.
The path to the most seats is widest for the Conservatives. Scheer likely needs to widen it some more to get where he wants to go.
Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer has stripped MP Michael Cooper of his spot on the House of Commons justice committee as punishment for Cooper's angry confrontation with a Muslim witness in hearings dedicated to online hate.
Earlier this week, Cooper told Faisal Khan Suri he should be "ashamed" after he drew a link between "conservative commentators" and the online history of mosque shooter Alexandre Bissonnette. Cooper also quoted from the manifesto of the man accused of the mass killings in Christchurch, New Zealand in an attempt to discredit Suri's testimony.
"I have spoken with Michael Cooper about comments he made at the Justice Committee earlier this week. Having taken the time to review the incident, I have informed him that he will no longer sit on the Justice committee as a consequence," Scheer posted on Twitter.
"Reading the name and quoting the words of the Christchurch shooter, especially when directed at a Muslim witness during a parliamentary hearing, is insensitive and unacceptable. Mr. Cooper has apologized. I accept his apology and I consider the matter closed."
While he has been removed from the committee, Scheer's office confirmed that Cooper will keep his role as deputy justice critic.
I have spoken with Michael Cooper about comments he made at the Justice committee earlier this week. Having taken the time to review the incident, I have informed him that he will no longer sit on the Justice committee as a consequence. (1/2)
Reading the name and quoting the words of the Christchurch shooter, especially when directed at a Muslim witness during a parliamentary hearing, is insensitive and unacceptable. Mr. Cooper has apologized. I accept his apology and I consider the matter closed. (2/2)
Cooper, who represents the riding of St. Albert-Edmonton, declined CBC's requests for an interview. Cooper tweeted a link to the original CBC story after it was posted online. That tweet has since been deleted.
On Saturday, Cooper tweeted a statement in which he said quoting the alleged Christchurch shooter was "a mistake" caused by a misunderstanding of Suri's comments.
"I absolutely should not have quoted these words nor named the perpetrator," he said in the statement
The eruption happened during Tuesday's committee hearing, when Cooper took issue with how Suri, the president of the Alberta Muslim Public Affairs Council, described the online history of Bissonnette, the man sentenced to life in prison in February for shooting six people dead in a Quebec City mosque in January, 2017.
"The evidence from Bissonette's computer showed he repeatedly sought content about anti-immigrant, alt-right and conservative commentators, mass murderers, U.S. President Donald Trump, and about Muslims, immigrants living in Quebec," Suri said.
Suri went on to say that people like Robert Bowers — who is alleged to have killed 11 people in a synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh in October — and Brenton Tarrant, who is accused of shooting and killing 51 people at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand in March, were similarly influenced by online hate coming from "alt-right online networks."
Suri told the committee that "online hate is a key factor in enforcing hate in all forms," including Islamophobia and anti-Semitism, and that more efforts should be made to study online hate and its effects in the offline world.
Listen: Cooper tells justice committee witness he should be 'ashamed'
CBC News
Cooper tells Justice Committee witness he should be "ashamed"
00:0003:16
An exchange between Justice Committee witness Faisal Khan Suri of the Alberta Muslim Public Affairs Council and Alberta Conservative MP Michael Cooper. 3:16
When it was his turn to ask Suri and other witnesses questions, Cooper laid into the Alberta anti-racism activist, accusing him of suggesting a link between "conservatism" and violent extremism.
"Mr. Suri, I take great umbrage with your defamatory comments to try to link conservatism with violent extremist attacks. They have no foundation, they're defamatory, and they diminish your credibility as a witness," Cooper said.
The Conservative MP then read into the record a passage from Tarrant's 74-page manifesto — which has been banned in New Zealand. In the passage, Tarrant is quoted as saying the social and political values of China are close to his own and that he rejects "conservatism."
Cooper did not mention Bissonnette's online history.
'You should be ashamed'
"I certainly wouldn't attempt to link Bernie Sanders to the individual who shot up Republican members of Congress and nearly fatally killed congressman [Stephen] Scalise," Cooper said. "So you should be ashamed."
Scalise and four others were shot in 2017 by James T. Hodgkinson, a Bernie Sanders supporter, who opposed conservatism in general and U.S. President Donald Trump in particular. Hodgkinson later died of wounds sustained in a shootout with police.
Cooper was interrupted and the committee quickly fell apart, with both Liberal and NDP MPs exploding in protest.
NDP MP Tracey Ramsey objected to Cooper's accusations, telling committee chair Anthony Housefather that he can't allow a member of the committee to tell a witness he should be ashamed of himself.
"I think that's unacceptable," she said to Housefather. "You're putting [Suri] in a position of vulnerability to have to respond to these attacks. He didn't come here today to defend himself, he came here to present on behalf of his organization."
Edmonton Centre Liberal MP Randy Boissonnault can be heard on the recording contradicting Cooper and trying to move the committee in-camera to address Cooper's comments.
Housefather swiftly took the committee behind closed doors, excusing the witnesses from the room while MPs discussed Cooper's comments. At 9:49 a.m. the committee resumed, with Cooper offering a partial retraction.
"While I certainly find the comments made by Mr. Suri to be deeply offensive and objectionable and vehemently disagree with them, I will withdraw saying that he should be ashamed," Cooper said.
"That was not unparliamentary, but I understand that it made some of the members of the committee uncomfortable. So in the spirit of moving forward I withdraw those specific comments, but certainly not the rest of what I said."
Former Aboriginal Affairs Minister Bernard Valcourt blasts National Inquiry into Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women and Girls report over 'genocide' finding. (CBC)
A former federal Aboriginal affairs minister under the Stephen Harper government is doubling down on his social media claim that the finding of "genocide" by the National Inquiry into Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women and girls was "propagandist."
Bernard Valcourt, who was Aboriginal affairs minister from 2013 until the defeat of the Harper government in the fall of 2015, blasted the inquiry's conclusion that the thousands of murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls were victims of a wider "Canadian genocide" inflicted on Indigenous people.
"How far do those activists will go? What has been the cost to Canadians for this propagandist report? What have we learned that we did not already know?" said Valcourt, who now lives in Edmundston, N.B., in a tweet posted on Friday evening.
"Who feels better in Canada among First Nations for that thunderous silly conclusion that all we wanted was to kill them all?"
Valcourt faced an immediate backlash on Twitter that continued into Sunday. That included reaction from leading Indigenous voices like Cindy Blacksock, who heads the First Nation Child and Family Caring Society, and Pam Palmater, chair of Indigenous governance at Ryerson University in Toronto.
The thousands of Indigenous women and girls who were murdered or disappeared across the country in recent decades are victims of a "Canadian genocide," reports the National Inquiry into Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women. https://www.cbc.ca/1.5157580@JorgeBarrera#MMIW
How far do those activists will go? What has been the cost to Canadians for this propagandist report? What have we learned that we did not already know? Who feels better in Canada among First Nations for that thunderous silly conclusion that all we wanted was to kill them all?
Valcourt remained unbowed during a Sunday morning interview with CBC News.
"I take offence to Canada being accused of genocide. My comprehension of genocide is measured by what genocide really is," said Valcourt. "I don't think it serves any purpose to call the action of the government genocide because it was not genocide."
Valcourt said "First Nations got a bad rap from colonialism that has given birth to this country." But he said that using the word genocide "won't solve anything."
The national inquiry said the evidence it gathered led it to conclude that missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls were the victims of a "Canadian genocide."
How far do those activists will go? What has been the cost to Canadians for this propagandist report? What have we learned that we did not already know? Who feels better in Canada among First Nations for that thunderous silly conclusion that all we wanted was to kill them all?
Dear Sir, The CDN Human Rights Tribunal found that the services INAC delivered under your tenure as Minister were racially discriminatory negatively impacting over 165,000 First Nations children. Instead of implementing documented solutions - you fought it. What did you learn? pic.twitter.com/62Uti26SNi
The inquiry said the genocide was "empowered by colonial structures" such as the Indian Act legislation, which was enacted in 1876, the Indian residential school system, the Sixties Scoop, the forced sterilization of Indigenous women and the child welfare system, which it called a "tool of genocide."
The inquiry, which cites contemporary scholarship on genocide to support its finding, said it would be publishing a supplementary report on the legal definition of genocide and its application to Canada and posting it on its website at a later date.
Where was your outrage and denial against @SenSincmurr Truth and Reconciliation Report which found that in its dealings with Indigenous peoples Canada is guilty of cultural, physical and biological #genocide Are you saying Indigenous WOMEN are less credible? #sexism#racism
Bernard Valcourt@BernardValcourt
Replying to @CBCNews @JorgeBarrera
How far do those activists will go? What has been the cost to Canadians for this propagandist report? What have we learned that we did not already know? Who feels better in Canada among First Nations for that thunderous silly conclusion that all we wanted was to kill them all?
110
The report also criticized Valcourt for claiming while he was minister that 70 per cent of homicides of Indigenous women were caused by Indigenous men. The report said the RCMP data used by Valcourt to make the claim was flawed and inaccurate.
The Canadian Museum of Human Rights in Winnipeg also now deems the treatment of Indigenous peoples in Canada as a genocide.
Crown-Indigenous Relations Minister Carolyn Bennett weighed in against Valcourt on Sunday with a tweet blasting the former minister and calling on Conservative leader Andrew Scheer to denounce him.
"Distressing to see @BernardValcourt displaying such ignorance," tweeted Bennett. "@AndrewScheer needs to denounce him & ask him to join Senator (Lynn) Beyak on the cultural sensitivity that seems to be necessary for all Conservatives."
Distressing to see @BernardValcourt displaying such ignorance. @AndrewScheer needs to denounce him & ask him to join Senator Beyak on the cultural sensitivity that seems to be necessary for all Conservatives.
Bernard Valcourt@BernardValcourt
Replying to @CBCNews @JorgeBarrera
How far do those activists will go? What has been the cost to Canadians for this propagandist report? What have we learned that we did not already know? Who feels better in Canada among First Nations for that thunderous silly conclusion that all we wanted was to kill them all?
177
Sen. Lynn Beyak was recently suspended from the Senate and kicked out of the Conservative caucus for refusing to pull down racist letters against Indigenous people on her website.
"It's difficult to imagine how someone who once held the job as minister of Aboriginal affairs could be so ignorant and insensitive," said Bennett in a statement sent to CBC News. "To dismiss this vitally important report as propaganda without even having read it demonstrates the kinds of attitudes that have lead to this national tragedy."
The Conservative party distanced itself Sunday from Valcourt.
"Mr. Valcourt does not speak for the Conservative party of Canada with these unacceptable comments," said Conservative MP Cathy McLeod, the shadow minister on the Indigenous affairs file, in a tweeted statement.
Thank you @Cathy_McLeod for speaking out. First Nations look forward to your continued support. #cdnpoli
Cathy McLeod MP✔@Cathy_McLeod
Mr. Valcourt does not speak for the Conservative Party of Canada with these unacceptable comments. The first move of our interim leader @RonaAmbrose was to endorse the #MMIWG& @AndrewScheer has been supportive. Tomorrow is an important day with the release. https://twitter.com/bernardvalcourt/status/1134572772007579648 …
13
McLeod's statement said that former interim Conservative leader Rona Ambrose endorsed the inquiry and current leader Scheer has also supported it.
Ry Moran, executive director of National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation in Winnipeg, which is the archival repository for historical records on residential schools, also blasted Valcourt on Twitter.
Moran pointed out how the former minister remained seated during a standing ovation at a 2015 ceremony where the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) released its calls to action and specifically called for a national inquiry into murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls.
Ry Moran, the director of the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation, criticized former Aboriginal affairs minister Bernard Valcourt. (Twitter/Canadian Geographic Society)
"There is a very troubling pattern of not listening to women when their needs are being expressed and when they are seeking justice for the very serious and terrible things that have been done to women over the years," said Moran.
"The harder we look at Canadian history, the bleaker it gets," said Moran.
Valcourt remained unrepentant for refusing to join the standing ovation in support of the TRC's call for an inquiry.
"When they called the inquiry and everyone stood up to applaud, what was I going to do, play the game? To be a hypocrite? I'm not," said Valcourt in the interview.
"I stand for what I believe and I did not believe that this was going to accomplish anything positive and I think I'm proven right."
Valcourt said the inquiry's report and his critics are playing "identity politics" and they have a right to their own opinion as he does to his.
"Identity politics is alive and well with the left and the ultra-left and this is something the government of Justin Trudeau is pursuing," he said.
Jorge Barrera is a Caracas-born, award-winning journalist who has worked across the country and internationally. He works for CBC's Indigenous unit based out of Ottawa. Follow him on Twitter @JorgeBarrera or email him jorge.barrera@cbc.ca.
