Censorship of the masses

Now let put these point to the aside, as we take a closer look at C-36 and other anti-terrorism laws that are being put above the Canadian's basic human rights and freedoms, as stated by the Constitutional Lawyer in the above article. For under C-36 it gives the legal right to go after anyone, which they consider to be a terrorist or their enemy in their sick twist ideas of corporation control.

All of this started when a twenty two (22) year old male failed to yield for Angus (birth name of Reginald Angus Argue) and his wife, as he hit them with his green 1993 Cherokee Jeep, while Angus and his wife were both were walking on the sidewalk minding their own business. In both Angus McLeod and his wife's police statement had this driver hitting them more than once. The young gentleman driver admitted that he saw both of them, as he struck them. In the police report, it only mentions that Angus and his Wife were hit once. However, the medical records from the emergency room on October 25th the day after of the accident. Combined with the doctors notes, showed that both Angus and his wife must have been hit more than once, because of their injuries that they suffered. In addition, Angus McLeod's (Reginald Angus Argue's) wife had to seek ultras sound for her swollen left leg on November 22nd, less than a month after this accident had taken place. The diagnosis was Confucius to legs, in other words both legs were injury by this accident. All of this reeks of police corruption, provincial government cover-up and Corporation control.



First Angus would like to point to the emergency room report just below this paragraph, which the lawyer and police officer should have used in the investigation of this particular accident. However, these people never ordered the Emergency Room Reports in what seems to be acts of censorship, injustice and police corruption. Angus and his wife had to order these hospital reports themselves in 2003. In addition, when Angus and his wife contacted the Calgary health department, they were informed that if anyone had originally ordered these reports, it would say so on the reports. However, there were no names on this report, which means that no one ordered them. So, the question would have to be, how could any decision be made in regards to this accident without these reports? Would this not show how a select few Global Elite with ties to the Federal New Conservative Party/ heritage front and National Alliance were attempting to undermine our justice system in form of censorship or some sort of police corruption? If this was true, these people's actions that were carried out against Angus and his wife were Anti-Democratic, and Unconstitutional. Now, how many other people are there in the Western world, who have suffered from similar circumstances of censorship, or injustices being carried out against them, all in the name of corporation control? Are there any lawyers from Lawyers without borders who would dare to stand up against these gigantic carriage of censorship and injustice?

Angus' emergency room report, from when his wife and him were hit on a sidewalk by a vehicle.

Angus' wife's Emergency Room Report

"This is Angus' wife Lisa's Emergency room report".

An Emergency Room Report in November of 2000, which showed that Angus' wife's leg had swollen up

This is Angus' wife's Hospital report in November of 2000







Here is a letter from Angus' and his wife's first Lawyer on this particular case, when he informed the Driver's Insurance Company, quote "I do not recall ever having given an authorization for a release of medical information to an adjuster in a Section B claim in my entire career." end quote

Letter from Angus' and his wife's first lawyer, which questions why the request of medical information.

Here is another letter from Angus' and his wife's first Lawyer on this particular case, when he was resigning from this case. In this letter it talks of Angus' wife's pink copy of her police report. However, it does not talk of Angus' pink copy of his police report, which he also filled out at the accident scene.

Letter of resignation from the first lawyer on this particular case

Here is the police Report on this particular case that has been one gigantic carriage of injustice that you would have expected from a police state, which has been carried out against Angus and his wife.

On page two of the police report it said Angus' wife had "no injury". However, if you look at her hospital report, B-section, and an ultra sound when her leg had swollen up in November of 2000 because of this accident, it shows otherwise. So the question is why is this policeman not telling the truth and why did he not order the emergency room report?

Page three of the police report it said that Angus had "no injury". However, if you look at his hospital report and B-section it shows otherwise. Again why did the policeman not order the emergency room report from this accident?

On Page four of this report, under Driver's Action it stated "Fail to yield Row Pedestrian" this alone should have brought a charge against the driver. However, no action was taken by the policeman.

On the last page of the police report, it stated that "Refused medical attention". Again here is another false truth by the policeman, because Angus and his wife went to the Emergency room the next morning.

Now, take a look at what Angus' and his wife's second lawyer responded when he was asked quote "Under what law can we not receive our records from the Insurance Company?" In addition, in the same letter the second lawyer stated, quote "The insurance company is under no legal obligation to release their file on you to us. Your reasons for seeking the file will not be accepted as your concerns for your safety do not seem to relate to this personal injury claim." end quote. So, what this lawyer seemed to have been saying was that Charter of Rights and Freedoms did not exist anymore within the Canadian border, and if you were threatened in anyway you are to keep your mouth shut or else.

Wow, this would have to be a pure example of totalitarianism, which heavily reeks of a police state actions. This has heavily gone against everything that so many brave young men and women have fought against over the years, in order to keep all of us free and proud. For in these brave people's memories the ideas of freedom, democracy, liberty, and justice should still be cherished and held next to all of our hearts. Once again where are the lawyers without borders, who may be able to step in an correct these injustices?

Here is another letter from Angus and his wife's second lawyer, which points out what they expect to be in this lawyer's file when they sign for it. However, Angus' police statement was not in this lawyer's files. In addition, Angus and his wife had to order the original emergency room reports from the Calgary hospital, which should have been in this lawyers files.

The second lawyer claims, "I believe that will cover everything which you have requested except I do not have the video" end quote.

Now, under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and even the Canadian Constitution everyone is suppose to have been guaranteed rights and freedoms, which are suppose to protect the people from actions of miscarriage of justice against them. However, as demonstrated throughout all of this link, on more than one occasion never have any of the rights that are suppose to be guaranteed for Angus and his wife been upheld by any of the people within the province of Alberta's totalitarian legal system. So, if these select few had been able to carry out these injustices were allowed to get away with these actions on others, how much longer will it be before these people are able to make the rest of society be nothing more than their slaves and robots? What has happened to the basic ideas of laws, lawyers without out borders and law were meant to protect people of nations from having their rights stripped from them. How much longer before everyone is forced to take computer chip implants, at which time tracking humans will be common place.

To further prove this point, here is an article written by Amanda Brown called, "Social Justice: Editorial A nightmare of Orwellian proportions". This article shows how Canada was in 2002, a year after the anti-terrorism bill C-36 was passed into law.

Our civil rights, which are promised to us at birth should be cherished and upheld as examples of how a Democratic Nations should be run. In order to do this, first we must hold the ones who are responsible for the denying of any of our civil rights in the way of voting against them, at time of Election. Secondly, we must speak up and be heard, as we make sure that our rights are there for our children and grandchildren. Thirdly, we should never hide in the shadows, letting anyone get away with forms of censorship against us in anyway.