Canadian Nationalist Party

Author: Travis Patron

  • Required To Live Where Unemployed

    The same administration that has deprived us of political standing is ordering us to reside in a locale that is not only anti-nationalistic, but undemocratic.

    There is no democracy here.

    This might not be a problem in itself, but combined with the fact that this same administration is refusing to disclose the information that has been used to de-register our Party, and deprive us of a democratic channel, it is a conflict of interest. We reserve our section 11(a) Charter right to be informed of the specifics of occurrence #2019-919038 within a reasonable time.

    There is no legal channel to advocate our policies. What we see is a society that claims to be democratic, but when reason exists to demonstrate the contrary, the affected Party is maligned and ignored.

    Under the treaty of Magna Carta, we are not to be deprived of our political standing except by way of judgement of our peers or by the law of Canada.

    “No free man shall be deprived of his standing in any way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the territory.”

    • Clause 39, Magna Carta

    And in particular, the Treaty of Paris provides:

    “His Britannick Majesty, on his side, agrees to grant the liberty of the Catholic religion to the inhabitants of Canada: he will, in consequence, give the most precise and most effectual orders, that his new Roman Catholic subjects may profess the worship of their religion according to the rites of the Romish church, as far as the laws of Great Britain permit.”

    – Article 4, Treaty Of Paris (February 10th, 1763)

    So while Saskatchewan treats our profession as a crime (Beware The Parasitic Tribe), they are required to inform the accused of the information used to proceed against them, and to do so within a reasonable time (RCMP file #P-2025-00838).

    The Crown has since neglected our right under the Privacy Act to a judicial review in the matter. This delay in acknowledging our right to access the information used to de-register the Canadian Nationalist Party is causing the ideology of nationalism to be excluded from society.

    Therefore, we intend to protest the continued infringement of our mobility rights as provided by section 6 of the Charter.

    If the Crown is going to restrict our access to public property, we will (in return) nationalize Crown property.

  • Bodily Harm Disputed

    On June 22nd, 2022, Crown Prosecutor Ryan Snyder presented fabricated evidence to a jury in order to substantiate their claim that I caused bodily harm to women in Regina (Information #991153654).

    The fabrication consisted of photographic evidence depicting bruising and swelling to the complainant (Exhibit P-1). However, the injuries show to the jury in this photograph were digitally manufactured.

    Upon objection from the accused, Justice Klatt refused further examination of the fabricated photograph.

    The complainant(s) testified that they were “slapped”, but the injuries depicted in the photograph were not even on the side of the face the complainant(s) were slapped.

    According to the complainant(s) statement, they were able to (eventually) confirm at the hospital that their arm “wasn’t broken”.

    The accused maintains that this presentation of fabricated evidence to the jury demonstrates the prosecution was conducted maliciously (as stated at trial) and with the aim of discrediting Canadian nationalism. We also maintain that (as a result of this malicious prosecution) more harm has been done to Canadian interests than the accused has caused any victim.

    Fabricating Evidence
    Every one who, with intent to mislead, fabricates anything with intent that it shall be used as evidence in a judicial proceeding, existing or proposed, by any means other than perjury or incitement to perjury is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.

    • Section 137, Criminal Code

    The exhibit shown to the jury was digitally edited to substantiate the claim of bodily harm.

    Definition:
    bodily harm means any hurt or injury to a person that interferes with the health or comfort of the person and that is more than merely transient or trifling in nature;

    • section 2, Criminal Code

    The Crown originally laid charges under section 268, claiming that the accused “maimed” the complainant (Information #991111114(2)), but later reduced these charges to section 267 assault causing bodily harm.

    The accused maintains that the verdict returned by the jury was a result of fabricated evidence.

    What we see in Saskatchewan is a prosecution that is oriented toward damaging Canadian nationalism rather than ensuring the accused person is provided a fair trial as required by law.

    The copies of this photograph disclosed to the accused are significantly different than that which was shown to the jury. However, the accused was unable to rebut the claim of bodily harm because the original photograph was inaccessible to them while incarcerated.

    The names of the complainant(s) have not been published here for discretionary purposes.

  • Double Jeopardized

    Once again, the Province of Saskatchewan is attempting to criminally proceed against us in response to our political speech Beware The Parasitic Tribe. However, the Crown has yet to provide us a public hearing in the matter as the information used to de-register the Canadian Nationalist Party remains undisclosed.

    For those who have bothered to listen, I have been raising this objection for several years now.

    Proceedings in criminal and penal matters

    “Any Canadian charged with a criminal offense has the right, if finally found guilty and punished for the offence, not to be tried or punished for it again”

    • Section 11(h) of the Charter

    Pursuant section 19(2)(b) of the Privacy Act, we have the right to access this information. In the meantime, we reserve our right to be presumed innocent on occurrence #2019-919038 in the absence of a public hearing:

    Any Canadian charged with a criminal offense has the right to be presumed innocent unless proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal;

    • Section 11(d), Charter of Rights and Freedoms

    We are jeopardized twice over by the Crown’s neglect of our right to a judicial review in the matter:

    Definition:

    double jeopardy – common-law and constitutional prohibition against a second prosecution after a first trial for the same offense.

    same-evidence test – The “same-evidence test” used in determining the issue of double jeopardy is whether facts alleged in second indictment, if given in evidence, would have sustained a conviction under the first indictment or whether the same evidence would support a conviction in each case.

    • Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th Edition

    On October 20th of last year, we made an application in accordance with section 41 of the Privacy Act for a review where the RCMP refused us access to information #991149331. Contrary to the opinion of the Federal Court, this application was made within the 45-day timeframe allotted for such an application.

    This information was obtained by a foreign entity and used to interfere with our right to stand for qualification to the House of Commons as provided by section 3 of the Charter.

    As it now stands, the Crown is violating our section 11(a) Charter right to be informed of the specifics of occurrence #2019-919038 within a reasonable time. We have made representations to both the Federal and Provincial government to no avail.

    Were the information publicly disclosed today (as it ought to be), we would not be required to live in a society where free expression is considered a crime. These conditions are prejudicial toward our right to mobility under section 6 of the Charter and are having a deleterious effect on our ability to maintain employment.

    The Crown is unfairly burdening us with residency requirements while failing to satisfy their burden to establish that access to information #991149331 may be refused.

    The Crown is neglecting our section 11(a) Charter right to be informed (within a reasonable time) of the specifics used to deprive us of our political standing:

    “No free man shall be deprived of his standing in any way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the territory.”

    • Clause 39, Magna Carta

    In response to this violation of our constitutional right, we intend to protest in furtherance of Canadian nationalism.

  • How We Know Canada Isn’t A Free Society

    When constructive political debate is criminally prosecuted under the guise of “combatting hate” we know that society is neither free nor democratic.
  • The Facist State

    The Facist State

    Definition

    “The facist state is not won by way of majority opinion or popular sentiment, but on the principle of orderliness and with the more intelligent organization of the body politic.”

  • [Ep. #36] Foreign Interference In Canadian Democracy

    The 44th Federal Election (September 20th, 2021) was held in the absence of the Canadian Nationalist Party. We reserve our right to have the validity of our imprisonment in Regina’s custody determined by habeas corpus, and where it is found to be illegal, a finding of fault under section 3 of the Charter where our right to stand for election to the House was interfered with by foreign entities for the purpose of transitioning us into the world’s first post-national country.

  • [Ep. #31] Enemy Within The Gates

    The Government of Canada should not conflate Judaism with Zionism. Nor should they confuse anti-zionism with anti-semitism.

    During his campaign for Prime Minister, Stephen Harper solicited millions of dollars in contributions from foreign lobbyist groups such as “Friends of Israel“.

    On July 25th, 2006, the Israel Defence Force deliberately killed one of our military servicemen (Major Paeta Hess-von Kruedener, Service #R38 868 507) while they were stationed at a United Nations observation post as part of a peacekeeping mission in Khiam, Lebanon. They killed a total of 4 United Nations peacekeepers as part of a bombing campaign that lasted nearly 7 hours. In response, Canada’s Zionist-Occupied Government under Prime Minister Stephen Harper concealed this war crime by removing from circulation media reports covering it (such as from the Ottawa Citizen).

    In early 2008, the Department of National Defence (DND) posted on its website a 67-page report into the incident, where the board of inquiry found Hess-von Kruedener’s death was entirely preventable and caused by the Israeli military. Less than a year later, the Harper government decided to classify the report and remove it from the government’s website. It has since remained off-limits to the public.

    Zionist Flag of Israel

    Now, the Government of Canada is attempting to hide this war crime by prosecuting those who speak out against it under the guise of “combatting hate”.

    In June of 2019, I published a political speech on our website entitled ‘Beware The Parasitic Tribe’ which the RCMP later classified as so-called “hate speech”. On April 16th, 2021, I was imprisoned at the Regina Provincial Correctional center for this political speech.  It seems the Government of Canada is hellbent on imprisoning political candidates who speak out against Zionist Israel and the harm this ideology has already caused to Canadian interests. To date, the Crown continues to withhold the evidence used to proceed against us under section 319 of the Criminal Code and violate our section 3 Charter right to stand for qualification as member to the House of Commons during the 44th Federal Election.

    Under Governor General Mary Simon, foreign interests have been allowed to take precedence over national security. It is not wrong to warn our people of the Zionist threat actively lobbying Parliament and the war crimes they are concealing. Our speech remains published on www.nationalist.ca/?p=9228 because Canadians have a right to know that there exists an enemy within the gates who is actively undermining our government from within – and further, that there are public officials and peace officers who are colluding with this foreign power in order to transition us into the “world’s first post-national country”.

    In the absence of full and frank disclosure of information #991149331 (used to interfere with Canadian democracy in contravention of section 20.4 of the Foreign Interference & Security of Information Act), the RCMP should not be proceeding against Canadian Nationalists under section 319 of the Criminal Code. The authority of Parliament is premised on reasonable access to democracy. We have been illegally deprived of this.

    Canadians are not beholden to foreign interests. This includes Zionist Israel. We have the right to criticize without being persecuted for it. Yet, that is exactly what this Provincial Government of Saskatchewan is doing by proceeding against federal party leaders in the absence of their right to democracy. This is a violation of our constitution and a violation of customary international law as we have no reasonable opportunity to counter the enactments used in an attempt to defeat Canadian nationalism.

    Canada’s Parliamentary system is oriented against those who speak out against the political ideology of Zionism. Deliberately depriving opposition party leaders of their right to a fair trial by withholding the evidence used to lay charges is a common tactic used by criminal regimes. It is done to suppress particular political ideologies in furtherance of state sponsored policies.

    The Province of Saskatchewan has been illegally imprisoning federal political party leaders for speaking out against the Zionist State of Israel and their war crimes against Canadians.

    Accordingly, we demand a judicial review of information #991149331 from the Federal Court in accordance with section 41 of the Privacy Act. It is our right under section 11(a) of the Charter to be informed without unreasonable delay of the specifics of these proceedings.