TDSB Bullies free speech.


picture-3552Ray: We had a comment made on our article about Dr. Kinsey and how his information about bringing underage children to orgasm is being used by the Toronto School board. Interestingly the TDSB did not tackle us for that article. Instead they attacked us for a comment made by someone else on our website. I researched what this other poster had said and found out that the only truth to what they had said was that allegations had been made but that the teacher involved was not criminally charged. I said so in my response to the poster. In effect I defended that teacher. However then the thought police started a war with me and my business which has little to do with this blog. I have decided to remove all the comments due to these bullies request. However I find it more newsworthy that these people bully those who speak truth. We spoke the truth that allegations had been made in our response to one of our followers comments. However even that truth is being policed by the Toronto School board bullies. I still find it very telling that they do not tackle the article itself that we posted which claims that Kinsey was a paedophile and that the school board is foolish enough to pursue the evil of trying to sexualize our children.

Friday November 08 2013

Ray Luff Investments Attn: Mr. Ray Luff

Re:  False and defamatory statements made by Ray Luff operating as Truth is What Matters blog to xxx regarding accusations of sexual harassment on her students.

Dear Mr.Luff,

We represent xxx in connection with the above-referenced matter.  RAY LUFF its directors, officers, agents, employees and assigns (collectively, “TRUTHISWHATMATTERS”) are hereby warned and notified to CEASE AND DESIST making false and defamatory statements regarding xxx and its ongoing matters.

It has come to our attention that false statements were made by Ray Luff and several commentors on his forum and blog Truthiswhatmatters.

The statements made by Ray Luff regarding xxx are false, defamatory, constitute tortuous interference with business, and as such, are actionable under Ontario provincial and Canadian federal law.

If our client is forced to commence a lawsuit against Ray Luff in order to stop continued false and defamatory statements, be advised that we will seek recovery of all attorneys’ fees and costs incurred herein as a result.  While we certainly hope this is not necessary, we are prepared to pursue whatever avenues are necessary on behalf of our client to stop the continued false and defamatory statements made by your organization.

Sincerely,

Howard Dooncriknev Acting Counsel for the TDSB and Ontario Teachers’ Union.

RELATED ARTICLES:

http://truthiswhatmatters.com/2012/11/02/paedophiles-are-behind-ontario-sex-education/

http://truthiswhatmatters.com/2013/07/21/paedophiles-setting-curriculum-for-education-in-ontario-revisited/

Categories: All Blog Entries, heteronormativity, paedophilia, sexual deviancy | Tags: | 10 Comments

Post navigation

10 thoughts on “TDSB Bullies free speech.

  1. GaterSlow

    file a complaint to the Ontario Human Rights tribunal….this intimidation looks serious because the toronto district school board is a government institution………….I’ve heard of bloggers who were critical of the tdsb having their blogs shut down for some frivolous reason…the tdsb is trying to hide something this is why they are bent on censoring everything which criticizes the tdsb….the victims of the tdsb’s censorship should hire a lawyer, go to the media and claim Charter of Rights infringement in a court of law…..these criminals in office and schools are pushing their fascism towards Canadians and that’s a fact!

    • Morrison Delonskiy

      This blog is culpable of cyberbullying innocent women. Ray Luff is a criminal and he should be imprisoned for his hate speech against women. I have worked with the teachers in question for 10 years and they would never commit any crimes which Ray Luff is smearing.

      The OPP and RCMP have a duty to protect Canadians from bastards such as Ray Luff.

      • The cyberbullying going on here is by yourself. As I stated before I only tried to defend the women in question who are no longer named in the comments of others at this site. It was other commentors who mentioned names. Truthiswhatmatters did not smear anyone. We reported a truthful story that the Toronto School Board uses literature published about how many times children as young as three years old can be brought to orgasm in the Kinsey report. We deduce from the so called scientific research that Kinsey and those involved with him who reported on this were engaged in a Paedophile activity. You have never made comment about that but you continually slur our website and make irresponsible and unworthy attacks on us.

      • I DID SOME FURTHER RESEARCH ON THE DNS THAT SENT US THIS MESSAGE THAT PURPORTED TO BE FROM MORRISON DELONSKLY. TURNED OUT TO BE A RUI HANG FROM KANSAS, USA.

        Name Rui Huang
        Handle C04682010
        Street 201 E. 16th st
        City North Kansas City
        State/Province MO
        Postal Code 64116
        Country US
        Registration Date 2013-08-27
        Last Updated 2013-08-27

        WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN SPREADING GOSSIP AT OUR WEBSITE AND WE WILL NOT ALLOW POSTS THAT ARE NOT SUPPORTED WITH FACTS AT OUR SITE.

        ALSO WE ALL STAND GUILTY IN FRONT OF OUR LORD. THE BIBLE SAYS THAT ALL HAVE SINNED AND FALL SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD – Rom 3.23

        FOR THE WAGES OF SIN IS DEATH, BUT THE FREE GIFT OF GOD IS ENTERNAL LIFE THROUGH JESUS CHRIST OUR LORD – Rom 6.23

  2. Frank

    How come my comments aren’t getting through at all? I posted 3 comments before and they vanished.

  3. Thomas

    Ray,

    What’s more disturbing is that a forum host Topix was in court with three TDSB Principals over some posts on Topix—the court granted the teachers a subpoena in retrieving the phone #, email addres, IP address login information (?) from Topix…..

    The 3 teacher initially requested that Topix hand over the information without the users’ knowledge. Imagine what the TDSB is doing in spying, monitoring and tracing people online…This is serious privacy infringement.

    already posted the link from a previous comment. The document is on Law Justia website under “cases” district court of california.

    Who knows what else the TDSB is doing to bloggers and people who are aware of the pedophile grooming curriculum?

  4. Acartia

    I have read several claims made against Kinsey. Admittedly, he is not the type of person that I would call a friend, but that is a long way from being a pedophile. Much of the misrepresentation was documented by Charles McVety. Not a big surprise given his history. But McVety made the claim that Kinsey paid hundreds of men to have sex with children. When, in fact, Kinsey interviewed a single pedophile (jailed) who claimed to have sex with hundreds of children.

    What Kinsey did was (and still is) considered to be acceptable research practices.

  5. Great post.

  6. Wayne

    Rev. Ray Luff ,

    The Ontario Principals Council is trying to gather as much evidence to make a case against blogs such as yours by using the claim that anonymous posters are defaming them with explicit postings.

    A 2nd Court order was filed in California, USA over the alleged defamation.

    Extract of the Court Order:

    Speaking of Charter rights, take a look at this Court Order enforced by a California judge on behalf of the Ontario Principals Council:

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
    IN RE APPLICATION OF ONTARIO PRINCIPALS’ COUNCIL, GXXXX , VXXXXX MXXXXXX, AND VXXXX AXXXX,
    Applicants.
    No. 2:13-mc-120-LKK-KJN
    ORDER
    INTRODUCTION
    Presently pending before the court is an ex parte application by the Ontario Principals’ Council (“OPC”), [NAMES ALREADY PROVIDED] (collectively, “Applicants”) for an order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782 granting Applicants leave to conduct discovery in this district for use in contemplated foreign litigation. (ECF No. 1.) After considering the briefing and other documentation in support of the application, as well as the applicable law, the court grants the application in part along the terms outlined in this order.

    BACKGROUND
    The background facts for purposes of this application are generally taken from the Applicants’ memorandum of points and authorities and various declarations in support of the application. (See generally Application, ECF No. 1; Declaration of NAME PROVIDED, ECF No. 1-1; Declaration of VNAME PROVIDED, ECF No. 1-3; Declaration of NAME PROVIDED, ECF No. 1-4;

    Declaration of TNAME PROVIDED, ECF No. 1-5 [“Warren Decl.”]; Declaration of Applicants’ Counsel MNAME PROVIDED Lee, ECF No. 1-2 [“Lee Decl.”].)
    S——-, M——–, and A—— are school administrators in Ontario, Canada. Abrams is also a member of the OPC, a voluntary professional association of elementary and secondary school professionals in Ontario, Canada. According to Applicants, they have been the targets of explicit online postings and comments on numerous websites accusing each of them of various incidents of egregious professional misconduct and illegal activity, including lewd and criminal sexual acts involving minor students. Applicants deny such accusations and believe that the same individual or group of individuals may be responsible for the allegedly defamatory online postings.

    The particular online posting that is the focus of this application is a July 12, 2013 posting made on the Edublogs website; more specifically, on a blog located at [WEBSITE], which has recently been archived and is no longer accessible to the public through the Edublogs website.1 This posting, inter alia, accused Applicants of sexual misconduct with underaged students and alleged a coverup by the school board and teacher unions. (Lee Decl. 7, Ex. 2.) Although the Edublogs user(s) responsible for the posting used a pseudonym, Edublogs informed Applicants that the IP addresses connected with the account that created the allegedly defamatory blog and posting were attached to an anonymous proxy service named A1 Anonymous Proxy, associated with the website (Warren Decl. 4-7, Ex. 1.)

    According to research by Applicants’ counsel, the A1 Anonymous Proxy website is owned and/or operated by My Privacy Tools, Inc. (“Privacy Tools”), a California corporation that was voluntarily dissolved around June 15, 2011, and/or Scott Hall (“Hall”), the former president
    1 Edublogs describes itself as “[t]he World’s most popular education blogging service…Edublogs lets you easily create & manage student & teacher blogs, quickly customize designs and include videos, photos & podcasts.”
    2 A1 Anonymous Proxy on its own website describes itself as “a web-based anonymous proxy service which allows anyone to surf the web privately and securely,” which in turn includes posting on forums anonymously. (Lee Decl. 6, Ex. 1.) Case 2:13-mc-00120-LKK-KJN Document 4 Filed 12/23/13 Page 2 of

    Furthermore, the requests do not seem to be unduly intrusive or burdensome. The subpoenas essentially seek documents that identify the names and contact information4 and/or the true IP numbers associated with the users who utilized the A1 Anonymous Proxy website to access the allegedly defamatory blog and posting on the Edublogs website on July 12, 2013. (ECF No. 1, Exs. A & B.) As Applicants point out, the universe of responsive documents is

    3 Because these findings are based on the necessarily limited record before the court in this ex parte proceeding, and in light of the court’s limited expertise with respect to Canadian law, these findings are not binding for purposes of future proceedings involving Applicants or other parties, and are made for the limited purposes of the pending application only.
    4 Specifically, the subpoenas seek the user’s first and last name; e-mail addresses; mobile, work, home, and other telephone numbers; country; postal code; Instant Messenger screen names; websites related to the user; and the current account status (active, deactivated, permanently deleted, etc.). (ECF No. 1, Exs. A & B.)
    likely to be relatively small, thereby avoiding significant burden. Thus, the fourth factor again favors granting the application.

    Because all four discretionary factors militate in favor of granting the application, the court grants the application upon the terms specified below. The court finds that doing so on an ex parte basis is permissible, because Privacy Tools and Hall will have an opportunity to raise objections and exercise their due process rights by bringing motions to quash the subpoenas after service with the subpoenas.

    Applicants further request the court to issue an order prohibiting Hall and Privacy Tools from notifying the A1 Anonymous Proxy website users involved that Applicants are seeking their information via subpoena. Applicants contend that there is a substantial danger that these users, if notified of the subpoenas, would destroy critical evidence located on their personal hard drives and computers before Applicants would be able to obtain a court order prohibiting destruction of evidence from an appropriate jurisdiction. Although the court appreciates Applicants’ concern, Applicants provide no discussion or analysis of applicable statutes or case law in support of such a request. Indeed, the users involved may have due process and other legal rights to contest the subpoenas on certain grounds, and Hall and/or Privacy Tools may well have legal obligations to notify their subscribers or customers of such subpoenas. In short, Applicants have not made a sufficient showing of entitlement to such relief.

    CONCLUSION
    For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
    1. Applicants’ ex parte application for an order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782 granting Applicants leave to conduct discovery in this district for use in contemplated foreign litigation (ECF No. 1) is GRANTED IN PART along the terms outlined in this order.
    2. Applicants may serve on Hall and Privacy Tools subpoenas in substantially similar form to those attached as Exhibits A and B to the application, setting a reasonable date for compliance.
    3. Hall, Privacy Tools, and/or any other interested person may raise objections and/or move to quash or modify the subpoena, as appropriate, prior to the date by which
    compliance is requested. Before the filing of any motion, the parties, entities, or persons involved shall meet and confer in good faith in accordance with Local Rule 251. Furthermore, pending resolution of any such motion by the court, Hall and Privacy Tools shall make appropriate efforts to maintain and not destroy any documents responsive to the subpoenas.
    4. Any documents produced pursuant to the subpoenas may be used solely for purposes of preparing for contemplated litigation in Canada, and shall not be disclosed to persons other than Applicants or Applicants’ counsel. Other than the specific names, contact information, and/or IP numbers requested in the subpoenas, Hall and/or Privacy Tools shall redact any financial or other confidential information (such as government identity numbers, credit card numbers, etc.) related to the users prior to producing any responsive documents.
    5. Applicants shall serve a copy of this order on Hall and Privacy Tools along with any subpoena.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    Dated: December 20, 2013

    • I however understand the need to at least contact individuals who make unsubstantiated claims and perhaps embellished claims to tell them to stick to the facts or face libel charges. As I understand it the school teachers in question were not convicted by the criminal court system. Therefore the charges made are not substantiated. When a person has not been convicted of a crime it is much different than if they are found guilty. I would like to see publication against such individuals cease myself. There are many criminals that have been convicted that time and energy can be given to discussing. But most of what is said about a person who has not been found guilty must be treated as innuendo and conjecture and hearsay if it could not been substantiated by a conviction in a criminal court system. I would like to see a lot of this discussion come to an end on this matter in this blog.

      The side issue however of being bullied for an anonymous comment at a blog does concern me. But I see that as well. Let Blogs be warned that they are being held responsible to moderate comments made on their websites. I do not think we should not be allowed to discuss certain topics based on facts which is why I promoted the topic by Charles McVety who provided facts about charts in Ministry of Education recommended reading materials which document what only could be an illegal activity. If others have comments to make please provide facts not innuendos similar to Charles’ in his well documented and researched comments.

      This blog was not intended to become a mud slinging forum. The Bible says that we are all mired in the mud. For some reason some of use feel less mired if we can point to how someone else is mired. it takes the attention off ourselves. The Bible says all have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Rom 3.23). There are things about each one of our lives that we are not proud of. Each one of is headed to a lost eternity if we do not repent of our sins and turn to the redemption offered by the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is more the type of message we wish to portray at this blog.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com. The Adventure Journal Theme.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 56 other followers

%d bloggers like this: