Oh, Dave, this is wonderful as it gets for purposes of asserting  "free speech / freedom of the press / the right to vote".
I will help in you in any way I can.
They've done so many bad things to you they're in the glue = BIG TIME.
Down here, during the federal election of 2004, Ron Churchill was electioneering at the Edmonds Skytrain station.  The Skytrain cops tried to run him off.  He was leaving, still talking back to them, had his van running.   They opened the van door and yanked him out, handcuffed him and took him inside and detained him.
After the election, when the dust settled,  I urged him to sue.  He hired a lawyer who did nothing. I told him to fire his lawyer, which he did.
Handling it himself, he won a Declaration of Right from the Supreme Court of BC in New Westminster that he had the right to do what he had been doing that day. He eventually settled out of court for the whole claim.  Part of that settlement was non-disclosure of the amount. But he won. And Skytrain officially announced that the area outside the fare-paid zone is public territory. 
Gordon Watson
Justice critic for the Party of Citizens Who Choose to Think for Themselves .
----- Original Message -----
From: David Thomson
To: Canadian Action Party
Cc: Connie Fogal
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 7:43 PM
Subject: On Informed Decisions

Ladies and gentlemen;

In order to make an informed decision, one first has to have all of the relevant information.

So why don't we hear anything about the Canadian Action Party? After all, they are a legitimate, registered Canadian political party. They are also running candidates in this most-important, up-coming, Canada-wide exibition that we will all, soon be expected to make decisions, based upon.

Coincidentally, CAP is the only party that is speaking out, candidly, about Canadian "deep integration" -
and NAFTA, specifically - abrogate!
and the need for Canadians to re-instate what once was the sole authority of the Bank of Canada; to create our nation's money.

As I recall, Svend Robinson was also speaking out, candidly, expressing the need for Canada to abrogate from NAFTA and to re-instate those powers, formerly exclusive to the Bank of Canada -
just before he shot himself in the foot, politically, over-come by some mystical impulse to steal a ring, in plain view of security cameras, yet.

Please be clear; I say this, merely as an observation, not to be mis-construed as to be in support of anything about Mr. Robinson, politically or otherwise.

What I do support, generally, is anyone with the courage to speak out, truthfully, in the face of such apparent un-popularity and where-in the mainstream press is concerned, in an apparent vacuum.

What I am also acutely aware of is that in Canada, we don't assassinate our political opponents - we assassinate their character...

As a passionate proponent for the right to exercise our freedoms of speech and expression, imagine my delight when Connie Fogal sent me an email, inviting me to represent "CAP" in this up-coming federal election campaign, their candidate for Kelowna - Lake Country.

In her email, Connie confided that I possessed all the necessary passion. I trust that it's also clear that I understand our common concerns and that I agree to contain my passion and stay on topic. 

Though I have yet to meet all of the preliminary requirements set out by Elections Canada, armed with Connie's blessings of approval, about 100 flyers and pages of forms for the collection of no less than 100 signatures and the required witnesses(?) in support of my nomination, I headed for Orchard Park, Kelowna's largest shopping mall. It was a crisp, clear Saturday afternoon, under a spell, typical of a prevailing Arctic cold-front. 

Flyers in hand, I approached fellow "villagers", offering them cheery introductory greetings in my most pleasant demeanor. Once through the food-court and then on down the main corridor, lined with shops, all tenants in this community-oriented shopping plaza, a veritable mecca of merchandise. I focused on those without a purposeful demeanour, people with a moment to spare; I didn't wish to appear intrusive; I searched out those receptive-looking individuals.

I didn't get too far when I became the subject of a search - a mall security agent did zero in on me, asserting that I was causing a disturbance. I assured him that I wasn't and the gentleman who had been conversant with me till we were interrupted by the agent, did not disagree with me.

Nor did he object as the security agent, commandeering my attention, herded me along with his imposing presence, insisting that I'd been causing a disturbance and that I would have to leave. 

He herded me around the corner, turning west, headed towards the Hudson Bay store. By now, the agent was insisting that I was trespassing, that everyone but myself had received an invitation and that I had to leave. I assured him that I had a stack of invitations, just like everyone else, here, piled up with our newspapers.

I told him; at best, his employer's policies were infringing on my duty to inform my fellow "villagers", that indeed, they had more choices than were being conveyed to them through standard broadcasting means. There's a great deal being left out, these days, really. He understood, saying that he'd been to my site.

It became plain for me to see that my concerns were pre-empted by size, first and then by numbers as a second agent joined us and between them, forced me through a side door that opened up into a long, empty corridor.

Up until now, I'd allowed myself to be herded but at this point, I resisted, futile, however valiant,  I was eventually forced, face-first to the concrete floor, my arms twisted behind my back, with these two agents perched on top of me. In the melee, my flyers and forms had gone flying out of my grasp, stripped like a football and then ground under-foot in the ensuing struggle.  

Perhaps I shouldn't have gloated at how long it took the two of them to subdue me; they only twisted all the harder and sat more firmly upon me. Still, in spite of a lingering back-ache, I figure that the imlications of their asserted position, does deserve to be challenged. I also figure that about ten minutes lapsed with me in this face-down position as we waited for an RCMP officer to arrive.

In the meantime, another hired agent arrived to assist his buddies. Eventually, they handcuffed me, picked me up and escorted me like a common criminal, to their office. One of security agents yanked me about, supposedly to prevent my bumping into other pedestrians. I made a few passing comments about the cost of making unpopular political statements, earning me even more aggressive steering behaviour, now challenging my ability to maintain my footing. I dug in, earnestly in deliberate protest.

Once inside the sanctity of their office, the security agent that had been steering me, became more civil. I remained indignant.

Constable M.E. (Mike) LOERKE Kelowna Detachment - Watch #4, eventually attended, culminating in the creation of FILE #: 05-65205 and my signed (under protest, threat duress and intimidation) agreement to a life-time ban from the private premises of Orchard Park shopping mall. I was only then that the hand-cuffs came off, after I indicated this obvious handicap to my ability to acquiesce to their demands.

Then, they didn't want to give me a copy of "the agreement". The good constable, Mike Loerke, intervened, first getting their agreement that it was indeed, a contract and then by defending my right to a copy of the document. They countered that they had no means - the photo-copier was locked in the manager's office. They conceded that they would provide me with a copy, the good constable, Mike Loerke, giving me his personal assurances that he would see to it, himself if need be.

On the way out, Constable Loerke told me that he agreed with me, fundamentally but that he took issue with my methods.

Constable Loerke, I say to you;

In the last 10 years, I have exhausted every "conventional remedy" that has appeared to be available to me - none of them have worked. It is only after considerable trial and assessment that I arrive at such an outrageous conclusion, leading me to the next step - those less conventional approaches, all the while becoming less compliant in the face of growing malicious ignorance. Clearly, it is not so much that which I do as what I refuse to do, now, that commands your attention, primarily.

I shall continue to rely on my fundamental rights to freedom of speech and of expression, even defiantly in support of the truth by which we base our soundest, most informed decisions.

Yours very truly,

David Thomson
c.c. Mike E. Loerke, Constable, Kelowna Detachment - RCMP, et al.