Thursday 11 August 2016

3- Israeli-Canadian Corrupt Jewish Dr. Michael H. Brent Abused Iranian Muslim Patient Right Honorable Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi; This is No #1 Israeli-Canadian Professors of the Corrupt University of Toronto Conspiracy vs. Major Nourhagghighi

July 1990 to December 24, 2016 Corrupt Jewish in Toronto

Major Nourhaghighi Discoered and Arrested
Corrupt Israeli-Canadian Jewish Doctor
Michael H. Brent

As a Member of the Worst Israeli Criminal Organization
that Believes Only Jewish Must Rule the World

Israeli Jewish and Harassing Signs at 456 College Street Toronto
Sample of Poster in Dr. Brent Public Office in Toronto Western Hospital
promoting Israel aggression and harassment


Author Major Nourhaghighi's Note: 
Since 1990 Hundreds of 
Israeli-Canadian Corrupt Jewish Doctors, Lawyers, Police, businessmen, Crown employees, Courts' Staff and Judges have targeted me as  an" Iranian Museum"  causing 26 years continuous legal battles.

The corrupt 
 Israeli-Canadian Jewish Professors, Lawyers and Judges of the corrupt University of Toronto were leading the Conspiracy to commit the worst crimes and attempt to murder against me.  However the said crimes was NOT ordinary crimes that Police be able to find Evidence and Charge them. They have abused all scientific searches to administrate drugs and  poison that can not be discovered. This is the main reason, that the corrupt University of Toronto is the MAFIA Center for a type of crime that I named it " White Crime" which means it is impossible, or very hard that Police be able to discover IF WE CONSIDER THE POLICE FORCE IS IMPARTIAL which is not in Canada.    


<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
November 4, 2010

The Registrar Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi
College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario 608-456 College Street
80 College Street, Toronto, Ontario; M5G 2E2 Toronto, M6G 4A3
Fax: 416-961-3330 

Dear Registrar:
This is a complaint against Michael H. Brent, eye physician and surgeon for professional misconduct.
I am senior Iranian Canadian Muslim, senior citizen. Today, at 10:35am, I attended at Brent’s office at Toronto Western Hospital, for eye exams. This was my third visit; usually takes fifteen minutes so I planned for my rest of day; however today took 125 minutes. I sat at the hall close to room 21, where nurse usually does eye exams then Brent at room 19 proceed for the rest of tests. About 11:05am, I saw a male senior citizen having Jewish hat, wearing black suit came at the hall; he turned away his eyes from me. I was sitting and waiting to be called, and a female senior citizen accompanying him. I stood and politely offered my chair to her. She with close face and hate took at me, and took the chair, put a bag on her hand on chair. She had attitude, seems to be rich and arrogant. She did not say thank you, as a common civilized manner. 

Brent, immediately, called them to room 21. This was the main reason that she did not sit because she habitually knew that would not wait like all other citizens. They were in room 21 for more than hour. In this period the narrow hall that I was waiting become so crowded that even doctors and nurses were complaining that: “We haven’t seen such crowd.” It was hard to walk, as most of patients were standing. The opposite to Brent’s offices 18, 19, 20, 21 [all these rooms are inter connected, there are four offices 15, 16, 17 and 18 that continuously doctors calling their patients. Only, Brent’s patients were waiting and complaining. Two female citizens were standing beside me, one about 85 years of age and other 65. The older complaining for long wait, the other seems to accompanying her said: “But it is, what it is, this is the System that we have!” Finally, the said male Jewish patient left. And all other penitents and I were called about 12:35pm.

Now, I sat on a chair in room 19, and wait for Brent. I had nothing to do, so I started looking at walls, I saw all around the room was propaganda for Jewish & Israel; one on the south wall was a framed kind of certificate, titled “Milton Harris, Professor” with religious draw on top. I memorizes and then did research at this site I saw an assay  http://www.csjo.org/pages/essays/essayidentity.htm that parts of that was saying that Jewish are seeking for the equality right:
             ” Religious Judaism does this now through the many yeshivot it operates and the rabbis who are trained in these academies. We need a secular/humanistic equivalent. Perhaps the newly created secular Jewish studies institute that has been established in Israel will serve as a prototype for secular Jewish communities around the world.

Finally Brent came to room and with rush said: “Everything is ok.” In a tone to get a positive answer from me, but I answered: “No, in fact my eyes got worst.” Brent spent about two minutes for all my exams and said: 
“Come within six month, no one year, no you don’t need to come again!”
As I explained Brent’s special treatment of a Jew turned all patients’ negative attitudes and complaints against our health system (OHIP) that with generosity is paying most of our medical expenses to make the citizens happy and proud of being Canadian. In addition, I have many Jewish doctors, like my family doctor, but I never saw any kind of Jewish propaganda in their office; I believe Toronto Western Hospital is a public office in nature and must be protected for any kind f political and religious propaganda. Even, worst is that Brent did not respect their own Jewish “Humanistic Equivalent” motto; the equality right in this case was that that Jew patient wait like all others, and just have TWO MINUTES like me, not more than hour examination! Finally, why Brent should talk more than hours, politics with that Jew patient that not be able how to talk with me as “Muslim patient!” I honestly believe that the Jews final talk was in such that he should reject Muslims.

MAJOR KEYVAN NOURHAGHIGHI

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

December 3, 2010

Private & Confidential


Investigator, Ms. M Mann Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi
College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario 608-456 College Street
80 College Street, Toronto, Ontario; M5G 2E2 Toronto, M6G 4A3
Fax: 416-967-2653 


Dear Ms. Mann
RE: SN/80411

Thank you for your time in reviewing my complaint with me on November 16, 2010; and I received your letter dated November 30 informing me now that you are the investigator of my complaint. 

Please in attached find two signed and witnessed consent forms to release my medical information and a signed copy of letter of Ms. Neville dated November 22.  

On November 16, during explanation of my complaint, I referred to my Ophthalmologist Gorfinkel, who has given me a referral to Brent . The following is information of my Ophthalmologist, as you asked for: 

John A. Gorfinkel, M.D. F.R.C.S.C.
Ophthalmologist
340 College Street, Suite 310
Toronto, Ontario
M5T 3A9
Tel: 416 924 2765
Fax: 416 924 0329

On November 18, I send the above information via fax to Ms. Neville. However she did not referred to it on her letter November 22, where she sent me consent forms.   

Please, write all your questions and concerns, and I would like to assure you that my complaint against Brent is purely constitute a professional misconduct, I made it with good faith and honestly.

Sincerely,

Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi

Iranian Senior Fighter Pilot



<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>


April 16, 2011

RE: Dr. Michel H. Brent, CMM/80411

Ms. C. Michele Mann, Investigator Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi
College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (“College”) 608-456 College Street
80 College Street, Toronto, Ontario; M5G 2E2 Toronto, M6G 4A3
Fax: 416-967-2653


Dear Ms. Mann:

1. This is a reply to your letter dated April 6, 2011, disclosing Dr. Brent’s response to my complaint against his professional misconduct in treatments of my eyes, in particular Dr. Brent failed to communicate with me in answering my questions & concern, failed to communicate clearly about fellow up appointment, failed to treat to serve me in accordance to schedules & has given special treatment to a Jew Rabay and his wife who had harassing & intimidating look at me and were very rude & hatred toward me. 

2. In addition, I complained that Dr. Brent had a Certificate of the Jewish extremist Organization in the room that he tested my eyes titled Milton Harris supporting the laws and policies passed by Israel Parliament. 

On November meeting that I had with you and your colleague, Sandra; you both were shocked that Dr. Brent has posted that Certificate in the treatment room. You both several times asked me to make sure that the Certificate was posted in the treatment room not in his office where his desk located. I confirmed. You both have asked me about exact location of the Certificate: I said, south wall, in the room where eye test equipment locate at the Toronto Western Hospital. You said that both of you will go to the Hospital as you should see yourself. 
Although you did not brought that in your letter to Dr. Brent. However, Dr. Brent as part of my complaint refer to the Certificate and posted three pages of photocopies of Milton Harris Certificate as the last pages of his response dated December 16, 2010.    
Please make sure that your notes of our meeting about the said Certificate; you visit to Toronto Hospital to find the said Certificate in the wall of room that D. Brent conduct medical services; Dr. Brent’s response and three pages of photocopies related Certificate be all before the Committee for their Decision.   

There is no doubt that the action of Dr. Brent was outrageous in posting a Certificate of an organization that support Israel’s extremists against Muslims contradicting the Canadian Charter of Rights & Ontario Human Rights Code in which the College has honest believe t enforce it as posted in the College Site:     

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario respects and supports the public policy goals 
of the Ontario Human Rights Code: to recognize the dignity and worth of every person and to provide
 for equal rights and opportunities without discrimination that is contrary to law.

Canadian & I, we LOVE to see the aforesaid College emphasize of the College’s public policy goals, which is fair, reasonable and read with the Canadians’ mentality. One of the main reasons that Muslim, Jew, and others landed in Canada is to be free of the conflicts that we never agree to them when we were in our homeland. Importing & continuing the said conflicts in fact is an action against the Canadian Constitutional Law  & the Crown. We all pay taxes in which paying huge bills made by Physicians. We all want to see that our payments to Physicians ended to the professional medical treatments.         
Dr. Brent responded that Milton Harris is an art, for many fascists and Hitler supporters; Nazi Cross, is a symbol of art in which you can find ample of images on Google Image. The Committee has duty to condemn posting any kind of materials in the Physicians’ offices that is not related to their specialty. 
3. Dr. Brent in answering to four issues highlighted in my complaint has repeated the term of 
“it is my practice…” then added false, and contradictory statements. You and the Committee must use extra caution to not mislead. Dr. Brent’s response is voluminous and replying to that is not productive. However, I reply to the major issues.   

4. I had objection Dr. Brent serving Rabay and his by demolishing all rights of other patients and I. 
Dr. Brent admitted to this complaint in last paragraph of page 7 of his response. His explanation was that Raay was 94 year old man. 
A) The majority of patients & I are old, and having age related eyes’ diseases.   
B) Neither Dr. Brent and his staff, nor Rabbi and his wife asked request from all patients and I to allow to be served ahead us. They forwarded no apology for extensive delay that made angry few patients.  
However, the attitude and negative behaviours of Dr. Brent, his staff, Rabbi and his wife was in such that they has such “right” ad they had used every time to visit Dr. Brent. I well remember the Rabbi and his wife were angry and upset for waiting just 2 minutes. His wife rudely did not say thanks when I offered my chair to her to sit. She did not sit. Because she knew every second Dr. Brent may call them.  
C) Dr. Brent who knew Rabbi for a long period, he could schedule him as the last patients in the list, not whenever they wish just drop in and get medical serves. 
D) I clearly heard that Dr. Brent and Rabbi, his wife were chatting & laughing for over 30 minutes.    
E) I am shaving my hears, in which I clearly saw the hatred looks like Jew  Rabbi & his wife, and I had feeling that they talked against me with Dr. Brent, and that was a reason that he did not schedule a fellow up.

5. Dr. Brent denied my complaint that did not provide information regarding his eye examination, assessments or findings and used the term of “it is my practice…”. The Resident is witness that Dr. Brent just talked with her and explained with medical terms. He never talked a ‘single word’ about my eyes with me.

6. Dr. Brent denied my complaint failed to advise him of treatment options available for his right Cataract. I well remember that YOU & Your Colleague on November meeting have kindly explained for me, for the first time I learned, that cataract must be thick to conduct surgery. Thus, Dr. Brent’s response is false.

7. Dr. Brent denied my complaint dismissed his questions when asked for clarification and again used the term of “It is my practice…”. Again YOU & Your Colleague on November meeting have kindly explained for me that Dr. Brent is retinal specialist; whereas, until November 2010, I was in false believe that Dr. Brent is going to remove cataract.  

8. Dr. Brent disclosed many unrelated issues; however, he force me to pay $150, for a test, that if I knew it was not related to cataract removal, I would never paid. This fact is omitted from his response.

9. Dr. Brent unprofessionally talked about the follow up schedule  “Come within six month, no one year, no you don’t need to come again!” He did not answer to this issue clearly to show that I was remiss. 

10. On January 12, 2011, I attended to John Arthur Gorfinkel’s office.. It was clear for me that Brent or an agent talked with Gorfinkel and asked him to mislead. That was the solo reason that I did NOT sing the “Consent” form that at least twice mailed to me.   As I complained in last paragraph: Finally Brent came to room and with rush said: “Everything is ok.” In a tone to get a positive answer from me, but I answered: “No, in fact my eyes got worst.” Brent spent about two minutes for all my exams no you don’t need to come again!”  I was a “regular patient” as defined by under the Ontario Regulations O. Reg. 114/94, s. 8 (3). Dr. Brent deprived me from professional medical services by Dr. Brent solely due to my believe to Islam, in which I am requesting the Committee emphasizes on respect and enforcement of Ontario Human Rights Code and an equal treatment by all physicians and Dr Brent.
Sincerely
Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi



<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
• ESSAYS 
Jewish identity and survival: a challenge for secular/humanistic Jews.
by Jerald Bain

Jewish history spans almost 4000 years. We marvel today at the continued existence of the Jewish people after all these years, after all the trials and tribulations that the Jews have had to endure. We stand in awe of what we call our survival - but how is that survival measured? The Jews today are an international nation of some 12,000,000 to 13,000,000 people. Joseph Schatzmiller, professor of history at the University of Toronto and director of the university's Jewish studies program, has estimated that had the Jews really been survivors, we would today be a nation of 250,000,000 people. We have lost numbers not only to genocide and slaughtebbir, but of more significance to conversion and indifference. If our survival is so tenuous, what of our future? Of what is our identity and ethnicity going to consist in the days and years to come?

In the not too distant past, being Jewish, Jewish identity, Yiddishkeit, were all part of the fabric of daily life. This is beautifully exemplified in Maurice Samuel's book, "The World of Sholom Aleichem" in which he describes the Judaism of the inhabitants of the mythical shtetl of Kasrielevke: "Life and religion were indivisible for the Kasrielevkites; they did not think of religion as something tagged on to life, something separate, detachable and optional. ----- what did a Kasrielevkite work for all week? To reach the Sabbath and celebrate it. What did learning consist of? The Bible, the Talmud, the sacred books generally, the literature of the sages." For the Kasrielevkites, their Judaism was their religion which was the total sum of their life. All other activity was an appendage, a means to sustain oneself materially while Judaism sustained one spiritually.

That town, those people, that way of life are gone. Yes there are pockets of Jewish communities in various corners of the world that try to preserve Kasrielevke, but fundamentally the town is gone, and only the memory remains.

The Jews of Kasrielevke had not encountered what we are now immersed in -modernity, science, a demand for answers to compelling questions, acceptance of ideas based more on the rational than the emotional. If we begin to question the existence, reality and relevance of God, then we must find new forms for an ethnic expression. We face a new problem - the problem of clarifying Jewish identity, of defining it, of describing, of subscribing to it in any form. And, this is a problem not only for secular Jews, but also for those Jews who find themselves in the synagogue and are not satisfied with traditional theistic responses to the major Jewish questions of the modern age.

According to Marshall Sklare, an American sociologist, joining a synagogue represents an "ethnic survivalist choice", which means that the synagogue serves mainly as a symbol of ethnic identity and not as a religious commitment devoted to the worship of God. Jewish religious and community leaders are concerned about attracting young people to Judaism because there is less ethno-cultural attraction in our modern age as compared to the shtetl days when almost the totality of life was ethno-culturally centred. Now we are faced with establishing a strong attractive pull toward Judaism, of whatever kind, in an atmosphere where there is little or no Jewish life or learning at home. Under such circumstances, where Jewish life at home is barren, the Jewish school, whether secular or religious, cannot hope to turn out Jews with a strong commitment to their Judaism and to Jewish identity.

In the spring of 1986, the outgoing president of the Canadian Jewish Congress, Milton Harris, was asked what he thought was the most pressing task facing Canadian Jews. He responded as follows: "I believe that the major direction that we have to go in, in the future, is to find a modus vivendi for a viable Canadian Jewish national life in a free and open society, and that means that our prime focus has to zero in on the reasons for maintaining Jewish identity. In the past, the main reasons were either religious and/or outside pressure, outside hostility. But we are living in a different environment ----- Now I know that those who are being brought up as strictly religious in our community are not going to have that problem - as they have not had in the past - but I believe that they are a minority in our community and that we cannot write off all of the rest."

So that is our challenge, maintaining and redefining our identity and finding new creative ways to understand our Jewishness and enlarge upon it. But before we do this, each and every one of us has to answer some fundamental questions for him/herself: Is being Jewish important? Why are you Jewish? Why expend effort to further your Jewishness? In view of what, historically, appears to be an apparent decline in the Jewish community - both in numbers and in Jewish content - is there a continuing need to be Jewish and to express Judaism? The answers to these questions have both philosophical and psychological implications.

Secular/humanistic Jews, who are organizationally involved, have answered these questions in a positive manner by putting forth an effort to search out one's own needs. Organizationally affiliated secular Jews have attempted to satisfy those needs while also contributing to the community at large.

The question of the value of Jewish identity was posed at the 1985 Leadership Conference of Secular and Humanistic Jews. Several responses are to be found in a booklet that came out of that Conference entitled, "The Secular Jewish Alternative", edited by Rabbi Sherwin T. Wine. Participants expressed a variety of perspectives: "Insofar as people are the result of past and present, they have, like it or not, identities identifying them as members of a group ----- The beauty of communal life is the warmth of continuity." - - - "One's Jewish identity is an existential fact; an accident of birth which does not need evaluative justification for the survival of the Jewish people and of its unique culture. It is the mainstay of the feelings of 'belonging1 " -----. "Through their Jewish identity, Jews also have a deeper commitment and understanding of their 'human identity1, belonging and being part of mankind in general." - - - "The value of Jewish identity is a positive approach towards one's Jewishness; a healthy appreciation of one's self-image" - - - - "What is the value of being oneself? Can one be an individual without reference to the group?" ----- "An attachment to the Jewish experience reinforces our humanism." ----- "on the whole, being Jewish makes me feel good. It gives me a sense of rootedness, of pride, of connectedness to my forebears; a social and symbolic framework within which to celebrate the changing of the seasons and the cycle of life; and a cultural heritage rich in emotional and intellectual associations".

Being Jewish has value, therefore, because our Jewishness is part of our personal identity. As the Jewish historian, Simon Dubnow, has noted, we are individual integral members of the Jewish people, but the reverse is just as true - the Jewish people, its history and culture, are part of us. We live in a symbiotic union with the Jewish nation and, therefore, with ourselves and our own sense of being. If being Jewish has value and importance, why is it that our sociologists tell us that the Jewish community is, in fact, philosophically weaker than it once was? Marshall Sklare, who in 1971 wrote a book entitled, "American Jews", has suggested that the contemporary problem in Jewish education rests in its new objective-preserving ethnic identity, assuring that our children understand that they're Jewish and should want to remain so. This is a problem faced by all non-orthodox segments of the Jewish community, whether religious or secular. The problem is heightened by the fact that parents have delegated their task of distinctive ethnic socialization to the school and to a large degree have absolved themselves of making a commitment to the enhancement of their own Jewish identity.

Given the anemic state of motivation to enlarge upon Jewishness within the general Jewish community, the secular Jewish movement has a number of significant challenges which it must address in order to have relevance and survive. Some of these challenges are the following:

1.    To affirm the value of Jewish identity.
2.    To make ourselves, individually, more Jewishly conscious.
3.    To establish and nurture Jewish institutions so as to create
secular/humanistic Jewish communities, for without community, what are we?
4.    To combat and avoid assimilationism if we feel that our Jewish ethnicity has intrinsic value to exist as a separate entity.
How do we accomplish these goals, these challenges, these new objectives of modern Jewish life? Many secular Jews are to be found in synagogues. These Jews may not recognize that they are secular but we know that philosophically they are because they believe in the humanistic rather than the theistic understanding of the world around us. They are in synagogues as a symbolic gesture of their identity with the Jewish people. The synagogue is the undisputed symbol of belonging to the Jewish people. Secular Jews will have to come up with a powerful alternative symbol before the synagogue will be given up as the major citadel of Jewish identity and ethnicity.

Many Jews, however, feel uncomfortable with the theistic ambience of the synagogue and they search for a means to express their Judaism in a secular manner. In the United States, some such individuals find themselves in the Society for Humanistic Judaism. The SHJ uses the synagogue format but the Jewish message is delivered in a secular manner. The synagogue format for some of the SHJ congregations includes a secularly oriented rabbi or spiritual leader. This approach is to be contrasted to independent secular Jewish organizations many of which find themselves within the Congress of Secular Jewish Organizations. CSJO affiliated groups function through an executive structure, and through various committees, programs are created and executed. Leadership is almost always voluntary and of a lay character. Many people have come to secular Jewish organizations of the CSJO type to escape the congregational format which often conjures up images of a rigid non-questioning approach to understanding one's Jewishness.

Despite these differences, the SHJ and CSJO have common goals and this impels us to find areas of common interest and undertakings and to work in co¬operation with one another wherever this is feasible and to our mutual benefit. We in the CSJO need to take stock of our strengths and weaknesses and ask ourselves whether our current loose organizational structures will have sufficient strength and endurance to allow us to build and expand.

What are the major tasks that confront both us as secular/humanistic Jews and the institutions in which we are active? There are three major areas of challenge:

1.   To enlarge upon our own personal Jewishness.
2.      To give our children a positive Jewish identity.
3.      To build our organizations and institutions.

How can we accomplish these tasks? First and foremost is Jewish education, both for ourselves and our children. Our education should be based on the recognition that all of Jewish heritage and the Jewish experience is ours to explore and exploit. The Torah and Talmud are the fundamental sources of our Jewishness - they are not the totality of our Jewishness, but they do provide the basic well of knowledge and understanding about the essence of our Jewish being and the mystique of the Jewish people. They can be studied, at least in segments, and we can accept that which is appropriate and reject that which is mythological and superstitious. We can extract those teachings that have relevance for today's realities.

But we need to do more than study original sources. We need also to become acquainted with the secular/humanistic trends in Jewish history. We need to reach into the treasure trove of secular Jewish learning and make ourselves and the Jewish community aware that secular Judaism is not an invention of 20th century Jews disenchanted with Orthodoxy, but that the idea of devotion to Jewish culture and knowledge, without God, has deep roots in the history of our people.

How can we enhance educational opportunities in a meaningful way? The ideal would be the creation of secular Jewish institutions of higher learning for the training of leaders who would act as resources for their own communities. Religious Judaism does this now through the many yeshivot it operates and the rabbis who are trained in these academies. We need a secular/humanistic equivalent. Perhaps the newly created secular Jewish studies institute that has been established in Israel will serve as a prototype for secular Jewish communities around the world.

It will take time, however, for such secular yeshivot to be established. In the meantime, each of us can explore in more depth his/her own Jewishness by self study and by group study. Each of our organizations can initiate study groups to explore the great and limitless heritage that we Jews have bequeathed to ourselves. We need to ask how much Jewishness are we prepared to instill into ourselves and what are we personally prepared to do to enlarge upon our Judaism and transmit it to our communities. In answering these questions, we must recognize that if we want Judaism to survive then our universalistic tendencies and aspirations must allow our Judaism to predominate or we will have universalism without Judaism. In the final analysis, we are all personally responsible for the fate of not only our own Jewishness, but the Jewishness of the Jewish people.


Saturday 6 August 2016

2- Canadian corrupt Doctors Seually Assaulted Patient Right Honourable Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi

Canadian Counter-Dictionary, and Human Rights' Violations in Canada
A   B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z


Three British Bastards Left No Dignity for Canadian 

VIVA FREE CANADA 


Author Note:
Murder, Torture and Sexual Assault by agents of the Whore Elizabeth II in Canada are common practice. The corrupt Police , Crown and Judges, are only may charge and convict "Immigrants" IF they sexually assault a White British Teenager.

IN other word, all immigrants and even color citizens have no protection under Canadian Law for Rape and Sexual Assault, PARTICULARLY MALE IMMIGRANTS!

Yes!, most of British Judges, Lawyers, Cops, Doctors and Government Staff are GAY; and their Daughters and wives are Whore! So they love to get sex with Immigrants.
They are very aggressive and without any shame touching Immigrants' sexual body parts in Streets, Malls, Government Offices, Court, Police Divisions, Schools etc. AND, clearly, asking " Give it to me , " Can I have blowjob!", "Im honey get $100 and fuck me!" " I love your Dick" etc.        

Since 1990, hundreds Canadian Male and Female are committing all kinds of unwanted Sexual Nature Torches and clear Sexual Assaults against me.
The Corrupt Toronto Police never charge them, and in my first report to 52 Division that a
woman torched my genital without my consent. The Cop receiving my complaint Laught and Several time asked me " A Woman touch you and you expect we charge her. What about us! If we touch you then who is going to charge us! Then fw cops in reception area all laughed.

These Bastard Cops, Lawyers and Judges under Leadership of Whore Queen NEVER had Dignity to understand that a Person Dignity is MUCH HIGHER than Sexual Need and when a person ask for a " Consent" to engage in sexual activity. The person self esteem and dignity will be maintain, it has nothing to do with age and sex of person, man or woman. Same as the corrupt the President of University of Toronto, that all its bastard Staffs, Instructors, and corrupt professors are daily sexually assaulting students and members like me; and when we complain, they are changing the story and saying " there is no Witness to support your complain, and it is better you dint go to that class, Gym, Library etc".  


However, the Canadian Doctors, are worst animals, as they abuse their Office Authority for Sexual Abuse. The Immigrants Patients and I, must perform a regular Check Up that allows they Perform Examination According to the Professional Code.
In Germany, in all medical exam, there is an assistant beside every Doctor to make sure that He/She does not abuse the Patients.

IN CANADA, there are Over One Hundred Thousands Files of Complaint as Against Male and FEMALES Doctors who have sexually assaulted their Patients and I.

I am not sure how many Male Immigrants have files Complaint against Canadian Doctors, Lawyers, Judges, Polices, Professors, Gym Instructors, Personal Trainers etc for Sexual Assault and Sexual Touches. However, I am proud to be the first Canadian, that from the first professional misconduct, I filed complaints against them.

The following Complaint for Sexual Assault is against a Bastard Doctor 
NGUYEN, who was the Judges & Cops AGENTS when I had many trials against them, banks and corporations.
So, the corrupt Doctor, who had confident that if commit crime against me, police will protect him. AND at the same time, he could see that I was occupied and stressed for all legal proceedings. So, he gradually commenced sexual touches and continued to move 
forward, without my notice. I was always the last Patient, spending a lot of time in chatting and many questions that sound like " cross-examination" and Judges and Lawyers were asked him to ask, and when he was noticing that I have lost my mental alert.
Then was using some kind of Spry in my Noise, alleging it would open my sinus, which indeed was casing dizzy and feeling sleepy, then would take me to exam room, helping me to be nude and .....


The Investigator of the College have obtained all Details and left in confidential way before the Board..... The 
Bastard Doctor NGUYEN, has closed his Office at 360 College Street in Toronto, and did never practice as Physician
IN the  following Table of Content, You will see a Large Number of Court Cases; I have brought that to prove my level of stress and mental anguish in which the corrupt Canadian Doctor Offender   


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


CONFIDENTIAL                                                                                               File No. 8615




BETWEEN:

MAJOR KEYVAN NOURHAGHIGHI
Complainant

-and-

DOCTOR KHOI BA NGUYEN, MD
Member Complaint Against



______________________________________________________________________


COMPLAINANT’S SUBMISSIONS RECORD

______________________________________________________________________


The Complainant, self counsel                                         Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi 
                                    456-608 College Street 
                                                                        Toronto, ON
                                                M6G 4A3

      

TO:      The Registrar Abby Katz Starr,                                                                                         151 Bloor Street, West, 9th floor                                                                       
Toronto, ON
M5S 2T5



Served to the Registrar on September 29, 2006, at 3:45PM by Personal Service

CONFIDENTIAL


TABLE

NO.     DESCRIPTION                                                                                                         PAGE


1.         First page of Application Record under Extraordinary Remedies under               1
            the Criminal Code: Nourhaghighi v. R. SM31-06; sat for Nov 14/06

2.         Letter From: Nourhaghighi; To: HPARB; January 13, 2005                                    2 
            RE: College did not reply to Complaint…

3.         Letter From: HPARB; To: Nourhaghighi; January 14, 2005                                    3 
            RE: Board has no power…

4.         HPARB Chair Condos’ Decision & Reasons v. College; April 27, 2005                 4

5.         Notice of Application; 04-cu-273627CM                                                                 6

6.         Home Inspector Heath Hazard Repot                                                                  10

7.         Endorsement Court of Appeal for Ontario v. Condo                                             11

8.         Order of Justice Pitt v. Condo & Caber                                                                13

9.         Order of Court of Appeal for Ontario v. Condo & Caber                                       14

10.       Federal Court Order of Justice LEMIEUX v. SIRC & CSIS                                   15
            Major Nourhaghighi v. SIRC & CSIS T-762-04

11.       My Letter to Owners of Condo Re: Toxic Mould                                                   16
            RE: Nguyen & College Public Interests Issue                


12.       Notes of Dr. Soboloff  MD to property manager                                                   17

13.       SUBMISSIONS                                                                                                    18


1.         Endorsement of Justice Coo                                                          June 16, 1995    1
Ontario Superior Court of Justice: Nourhaghighi v. Toronto Hospital et al
2.         Endorsement of Justice Boland                                                    March 27, 1996
            Ontario Superior Court of Justice: Condominium 935 v. Nourhaghighi

3.         Endorsement of Justice Boland                                                    March 27, 1996
            Ontario Superior Court of Justice: Condominium 935 v. Nourhaghighi

4.         Endorsement of Justice Day                                                          September 1997
Ontario Superior Court of Justice: Nourhaghighi v. Toronto Police et al

5.         Few pages of Justice Cadsby’s Judgment v. Toronto Police   November 1997        
Ontario Court of Justice: R. Toronto Police v. Nourhaghighi

7.         Endorsement of Justice Campbell of the                                     June 2, 1999
Federal Court of Canada: Canada v. Nourhaghighi

8.         Order of Justice Lemieux v. SIRC                                                January 2005
Federal Court of Canada: Nourhaghighi v. SIRC

9.         Endorsement of Justice Pitt,                                                          April 26, 2005
Ontario Superior Court of Justice: Nourhaghighi   v. Condominium 935

10.       Endorsement of the Ontario Court of Appeal                              January 2006
Nourhaghighi iv. Condominium 935-applicant

11.       Pending Application: Extraordinary Remedies v. the Crown    February 2006
            First page of Notice of Application                                                         

12.       Concise findings: Commission for Compliant against RCMP  ….. 2006
Nourhaghighi v. RCMP
            The Original Decision is classified ‘Secret’  

13.       Concise findings of Security Intelligent Review Committee May 12, 2006 
            Nourhaghighi v. Canadian Security and Intelligent Services (“CSIS”)
            The Original Decision is classified ‘Secret’  
15.       Authorities
            Judgment against justice of peace Balckmon  for sexcual …


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


CONFIDENTIAL                                                                                                       File No. 8615

HEALTH PROFESSIONS APPEAL AND REVIEW BOARD (“BOARD”)

BETWEEN:
KEYVAN NOURHAGHIGHI
Complainant
-and-

KHOI BA NGUYEN, MD
Member Complaint Against (“Nguyen”)


COMPLAINANT’S SUBMISSIONS


PART I
STATEMENT OF CASE

1.         I made a request that the Board, in accordance with law, reviews the unfair, and erroneous Decision 1 of the Committee concerning my complaint against Nguyen where the inadequacy of the investigation and biased 2,3,4,5 are few grounds for this appeal.    

2.         On September 27, 2006 I got two letters from Starr 6, 7 asking for the grounds of confidentiality, the fresh evidence, and submissions to be filed by 09/29/06; this short notice was unfair. Further, Goldblatt 8 and Pond 9 during telephone conference, consented that hearing be held in the confidential. The burden is upon Osborne 7 to explain why this fact was omitted from her Report; and why on same day of conference did not inform me of the deadline-09/29/06. Osborne refers to Rule 8, but did not send a copy of Rules that I learn all my rights; yet Rule 8 is in the Report; these submissions are satisfying its parameters and considering also the conditions of fresh evidence too. 

1              Decision of October 2005 (“Decision”); the Complaints Committee Record (“M”)
2              The Defendant, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (“College”)
3              Nourhaghighi v. Toronto Hospital et al: 95-CU-84058
4              Nourhaghighi v. Ontario Judicial Council et al: 96-CU-104952
5              Nourhaghighi v. Bell Canada et al; 96-CU-113026
6              Registrar, Abby Katz STARR (“Starr”), mailed the Per-Conference Report of August 31, 2006 (“Report”) on Sept 8; and hearing date of October 26, 2006; on Sept 11; both by regular mails         
7              Report of the Chair of the Per-Review Conference, Ms. Katie OSBORNE (“Osborne”)
8              Mr. Jordan GOLDBLATT, the Counsel on the record for Dr. Nguyen (“Goldblatt”)
9              Ms. Jan POND for the College (“Pond”)

CONFIDENTIAL                                                                                                                   2

PART II
STATEMENT OF FACTS

3.             I am Iranian Muslim single parent citizen. In 1980 Iranian arrested Americans’ spies10; since then there are enormous planed poisonous propaganda against us by   certain media in Canada that the Crown 11 has improper influence on them 12.  Further, the Crown’s policy is clearly against Muslim and Iranian that raised many protests and liability against the Crown inter alia I filed application under the Extraordinary Remedies of the Criminal Code and Charter against the Crown for obstructing my access to all courts’ services and arbitrary dismissing all my files. Justice Hamilton of Superior Court of Justice scheduled November 14, 2006 for per hearing. In my reply I must relay in this file as the Crown submitted Ducharme Order that was related to moulds in my Condo 13.

M1-M8 contains my complaints and few evidence against Nguyen;
M4-M7&M32-M35 are photos of moulds.
M29-third para: …several times I complained against toxic mould and having breathing problems. Nguyen asked me to find the name of mould and report to him…Nguyen said Stachybotrys do not grown in house and drywall, it grown on plastic.
M33:Expert report is contrary to Nguyen; photographs 1&2 Obvious visible mould on gypsum board ceiling. Nguyen criticized me for taking action…In last few years, I made constant complaints for having breathing problems, allergies, and headache...maliciously did not send me to any skin and respiratory specialists
M29-second para. He is suing his Condo corporation

On October 19, 2004 the Court made Order that the Condo must investigate the issue of heath hazard and sat February 23, 2005 for hearing that the Court made Order against the Condo for repair that again the Condo disobeyed Orders:
M25-Nov 29/04 Patient is agitated, shouted that the mold has been identified as very toxic…accused me of conspiracy with his Condo management by delay his treatment and referral. He calls me “ a criminal” and stated he will complain to the College.  

SUBMISSION RECORD    First page of Notice of Application SM31-06 13; p. 1


10             444 Days imprisonments of American’s spies, arrested at the US Embassy in Tehran; the end of
diplomatic relationship with US; American’s military attacks and shutting down the Iranian Airbus with missiles killing over 300 passengers; Supporting Iraq in war against Iran and encouraging
Iraq in explosions of several chemical bombs in Iran causing billions dollars damages to Iranian
11             The Crown defendants in my actions: The Federal, Ontario and Quebec Governments,
12             Defendant Toronto Star, Action 96-CU-104952; Defendant Globe &Mail, Action 96-CU-113026
13             Application Record of Respondent Her Majesty the Queen (“Ontario”) filed by the Contemnors Crown’s Lawyers W. LIGHTFOOT; H. MACKAY; file SM 31-06 
HPARB/ CONFIDENTIAL/ File # 5615                                                                             3
               
4.         I was the systematic inspector 14. I discovered ample corruptions of the Crown and the Courts 3, 4, 5, 13, 15and acted duly. Police 16 targeted me with malice, torture17, and felonies 18 causing serious injuries like fractures of bones 19 to me requiring services by the medical professions, obstructing my access to the hospitals 3, 4 and medications. However, the Committee did not uphold my complaints as the College’s investigations was dishonest and biased, the prosecutions was corrupt and made in my absentia 3, 4, 5
In April 2004 I filed a judicial review application against SIRC & CSIS 16 that a writ of mandamus be issued against SIRC to investigate my complaint against CSIS, in which SIRC without proper investigation closed my file. The Respondent, the Attorney General of Canada admitted to my submissions that I had rights to be present before SIRC that on January 31, 2005, Justice LEMIEUX made Order against SIRC. Therefore, I got five days hearing before SIRC Chair Gary FILMON who uphold my complaint, in part, and made Order that CSIS must apologize from me.     

In June 2004 my kitchen’s ceiling collapsed due to toxic moulds and until June 2005 my Condo refused to repair due to the Crown and Police interference as they want make me busy with ‘moulds’ that I could NOT focus on my research and presentation before
LEMIEUX & FILMON.

In August 2004 I filed application against Condo for disobeying Orders to repair water damages that ended to growth of toxic moulds. Justice Ducharme made Order for cross- examinations of affidavits be commenced of December 1, 2004.  

In November 29, 2004 Nguyen had another misconduct with me to increase my stress and frustration during the most important step of my legal proceedings. M25-Nov 29/04


5.         On December 13, 2004 I served my complaint against Nguyen to the College.
I called several times got no proper answer. I objected to intake Officers for not sending reply to me. It was very unusual. I served that the College did not deny the receipt. There is nothing in the record that indicates the initial correspondence send to me.   

14             In the Iranian Air Force, as a second job to my main profession senior fighter & transport pilot
15             The Courts: The Federal Court, the Ontario Courts, the Quebec Courts; Federal Court of Appeal, Court of Appeal for Ontario, Court of Appeal for Quebec and the Supreme Court of Canada 
16             POLICE: Federal Police: the Canadian Royal Mounted Police (“RCMP”); the Canadian Security Intelligent Service (“CSIS”); Provincial Police: the Ontario Provincial Police (“OPP”); the Quebec Provincial Police (“QPP”) Municipal Police: Montreal Police, Ottawa Police, Quebec City Police, Toronto Police et al (“POLICE”)
17             Ontario [Toronto Police Offenders] v. Nourhaghighi; Judgment of Justice Cadsby
18             Forgery & Fraud in Motor Vehicle Accident (“MVA”) Report by Toronto Police; RE Justice Bigelow
19             Fracture of my Rib # 8 is admitted by St. Michael Hospital; after denial of Toronto Hospital and Mount Sinai Hospital, when Police agents lost me in their interception due my advance tactics
CONFIDENTIAL                                                                                                                   4

6.         On January 13, 2005 I wrote to the Board that the College did not reply to my complaint. Starr replied: Board has no power to require the College to acknowledge or reply to you regarding your complaint -these letters are not in the record. Few weeks after, I got a letter from Fewer asking me to call him-M9. While I was stressed in my prosecution against Condo, yet several times I called and left messages. I did not get any reply. I complained to the Board against the College-M12. 
SUBMISSIONS RECORD My letter Jan 13/05, p.2; HPARB letter Jan 14/05, p,3

7.         On April 14, 2005 the Deputy Registrar, James TERRY sent a copy of my letter to the College and asked five following questions-M10-11.
1) What is history of investigation?
2) Specifically, what investigatory steps, if any, remain to be either commenced or completed?
3) What, if any, required information or documentation remains outstanding?
    Specifically, what steps will the College be talking to secure the outstanding required information?
4) What is the matter likely to be considered by the Complaints Committee?
5) What is the Complaints Committee’s explanation for delay in the disposition of this matter?           

There is no evidence that the College comply with the Deputy Registrar’s instructions. However, on April 25, 2005, the College-Truster fraudulently alleged that it was unclear whether the complainant wished to proceed-M54. The Board could ask that: Whether Inspector Fewer took any step, by mean of follow up letter, to make unclear issue clear?   
I intentionally did not provide a telephone number that due to the confidentiality of the issue to get chance to talk face to face with the inspector, as its is procedure. Further, Fewer did not send copy of Nguyen’s reply to me-M15-17 for my reply to it; nor informed me that whether got my medical record, or whether medical record is complete and without my notice, forwarded its incomplete investigation to the Committee.
I had rights to a complete presentation before the Committee, as I have same rights before the Board. The Committee erred in fact that the investigation before it was complete, did not examine with honestly and impartiality the investigator’s letters on the record-M52-56 inter alia did not asked for the investigator’s notes for letter January 25, 2005, did not demand answer for letter April 21, 2005 that why I should be obligated to send consent within 10 days, did not examine  letter April 25, 2005  to determine that the actions of the investigator and the Committee Support Manager were constructive.
HPARB/ CONFIDENTIAL/ File # 5615                                                                             5

8.         On April 27, 2005, Chair Condos rendered Decision & Reasons against the College that was omitted by the investigator Fewer in records before the Committee, and is not disclosed to disclosure too. Condos did not give a chance of reply to me and arbitrary, as usual, relied on the College reply; yet, confirming my facts in last paragraph that: While the College might well have been more proactive in ascertaining Major Nourhaghighi’s intentions…in which these reasons shall be weighted to the professional negligence against the Investigator Fewer, and the College.          
SUBMISSIONS RECORD Condos’ Decision & Reasons; p. 4

9.         On April 28, 2005, the Court made Order against my Condo’s property manger to clean the mould, contrary to Nguyen’s will and action in obstruction of justice that I b able to have proper medical record indicating injuries that I suffered due to toxic moulds. 
The Crown and Police interference with normal business of citizens and my Condo has ended to over $500.000 legal expenses my Condo and me, where large numbers of owners are very low income like me, and protesting against the board of directors calling them names, thieves, cheaters etc. The Crown and Police encouraged the Condo to appeal against the Costs Order of Justice Pitt and claim more than $100.000.00 from me. I represent myself in the Ontario Court of Appeal, and again, I got judgments against the dishonest, biased board of directors. This was additional success        
In obtaining Orders against the Crown’s parties inter alia I got Judgments by representing myself at trials against defence lawyers of the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, the Bank of Nova Scotia, and several small corporations of accused of ‘wrongful dismissal’ due to improper influence of the Crown.  
SUBMISSIONS RECORD Notice of Application; 04-cu-273627CM                          p.6
Home Inspector Heath Hazard Repot                              p.10
Endorsement Court of Appeal for Ontario v. Condo      p.11   
                                                Order of Justice Pitt v. Condo & Caber                            p.13
Order of Court of Appeal for Ontario v. Condo & Caber p.14
Order of Federal Court Order v. SIRC & CSIS               p.15               Major Nourhaghighi v. SIRC & CSIS T-762-04
                                                RE: Paragraph 4 of these submissions              
                                                My Letter to Owners of Condo Re: Toxic Mould            p.16
                                                RE: Nguyen & College Violated Public Interests Issue            
HPARB/ CONFIDENTIAL/ Nguyen File # 5615                                                              5

10.       Since I was child, I had periodical medical examinations. I became pilot, and senior pilot that continue my periodical medical examinations in Iran, Pakistan, German and Canada. I had relatives who were physicians. Therefore I have personal knowledge and experiences of the physicians’ professional conduct, and the physicians’ standards of practice. I used the said parameters in filing my complaint against Nguyen’s sexual assault during prostate test.-M2:last para. This was an important issue that I had rights to sit and discuss with the investigator face to face to provide the particulars.               

11.       The Committee in page 2, at subparagraph title superscript “1”, line 9 is referring to my letter dated May 9 and the fact that I wrote: the “College’s Investigator Fraud” adding: “Mr. Nourhaghighi had written to HPARB…asserting that the College was not acting with honestly and good faith” I was unable to find the said letter-May 9, in the College’s record, in the Board’s disclosure and in my own personal record.  This letter must be served and filed by the College, at least three weeks before the hearing.

12.       While Nguyen for years denying issuing a referral to specialists. However, in December 2004 I changed my family doctor, and have got ample referrals. This fact is not contradictory to the facts that the Crown and Police did not interfered with my medical care and Nguyen. My complaint against Nguyen, Orders against SIRC and Condo and angers of owners in my Condo were ‘Red Lights’ to the Crown and Police to cease their crimes against me, for a while. All learn judges and lawyers in Canada are fully aware that no one in Canada has more knowledge and master evidence of the crimes of the Crown. My new family physician, in addition to ample referrals even wrote a notice to my Condo’s property manager to provide me with accommodations before clearing the mould. Soon, for the first time I discovered that I have very serious heath problems and must consider many factors in my life that Nguyen never has given chance to a specialist to discover it.      
SUBMISSIONS RECORD Notes of Dr. Soboloff MD to property manager  p.16

CONFIDENTIAL                                                                                                                   7

13.       The College did not sent Nguyen’s reply to me. After reviewing disclosure, I discovered more evidence against Nguyen that the Crown has used to mislead CSIS & SIRC. I testified before SIRC that the ’Attorney General of Ontario’ by forgery drafted false materials against me and asked CSIS to signed and mislead the Minister of Citizenship then as a ‘federal information against me. All documents in this issue are marked SECRET. At this time I am unable to disclose more facts in this issue.    



PART III
POINTS IN ISSUE

14.       The issue is:
A.        Whether there were complete Records before the Committee?
and if the answer is the affirmative; then,

B.        Whether there is a complete ‘Respecting Disclosure of Records’ before the Board that satisfies s.31 of the Regulated Heath Processions Act, 1991 (“RHPA”)? 
and if the answer is the affirmative; then,

C.        Whether two days short notice for presentation of submissions before the Board  for a self counsel complainant constitute a fair and reasonable notice?
and if the answer is the affirmative; then,

D.        Whether there is evidence to proof that the investigation was complete, there was no bias on the part of the College and Investigator, in particular where sexual assault and public interest issue-Moulds were parts of complaints and the Committee made a fair and reasonable decision in my absentia?  

CONFIDENTIAL                                                                                                                   8
PART IV
LAW & ARGUMENTS

15.       It is respectfully submitted that the answers A, B, & C to the per-review hearing are the negatives; and October 26, 2006 is a pre mature for fair reviewing of this case.
I admit to the fact that I erred in telephone conference by submitting that the records are complete; as it has never happened in all my reviews that the College files a defective disclosure. Further, the telephone conference was a new process for me that I have never witnesses in HPARB.

16.       In any event that the Board provides the affirmatives answers to questions A, B, & C, I will present my argument of law orally, as it is scheduled; and in summarily I would submit that it is instructed by the Health Professions Procedural Code, 51. (1)
A panel shall find that a member has committed an act of professional misconduct if, …
(b.1) the member has sexually abused a patient; 
(c) the member has committed an act of professional misconduct as defined on the regulations. 1991, c.18, Sched. 2, s. 51(1); 1993, c.37, s..14(1).

17.       Further, the sexual abuse of a patient is defined as:
(a) sexual intercourse or other forms of physical sexual relations between the member and the patient,
(b) touching, of a sexual nature, of the patient by the member, or
(c ) behaviour or remarks of a sexual nature by the member towards the patient. 1993, c. 37, s.4.     

18.       It is submitted that bias is a major factor for review of the Committee’s decisions on its merits, and to accomplish it the Board must be lead with all ‘information and records’ that the College and investigator had, but did not forwarded to the Committee in first instant before the Committee making its decision. And f the Committee have seen all my documents disclosed with my letter dated May 9, 2005, then I have right
CONFIDENTIAL                                                                                                                   9

that the Board those documents too. In sexual assault the faith of prosecutor is playing a main role. In case of “Discipline September/October 1993; Dr, Roger Edward Morgan; Sudbury” it is been clearly instructed that the College has duty to prosecute properly. We all know by experience that when the prosecutor has interests, or is biased, or his/her investigation is not complete, never a fair judgment would be rendered.        

19.       Furthermore, I would rely in the Heath professions Act, the Quality of Care Information Protection Act, 2004, the Regulated Heath Professional Act, 1991
The Personal Heath Information Act, 2004; at section 72-1 instructed that A person is guilty of an offence if the person, willfully collects uses or discloses personal heath information in contravention of this Act or its regulations. 


PART V
ORDER REQUESTED

20.       I request that the hearing of this file sat for October 26, 2006 be adjourned until  
a complete disclosure served to me and file duly. 
In alternative, I request if these submissions have sufficient weight to satisfy the Board that the Committee has made its decision upon inadequate investigations forwarded by the investigator Fewer, return my complaint to the Committee and makes order that, in accordance with law, the Committee commence new investigation in such I get chance of ‘personal appearance’ before the Committee and testify under the Oath against Nguyen.  In this case, taxpayers are saving a day of hearing.    
In further alternative, the Board reviews the Committee decisions in accordance with law.
ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED

Dated in Toronto, this September 29, 2006        MAJOR KEYVAN NOURHAGHIGHI


Cases: Committee Decision found that Dr. Lam Van Nguyen had committed an act of of professional misconduct, guilty of sexual assault; suspension for six month.

Exact case of mine

Discipline September/October 1993
Dr, Roger Edward Morgan; Sudbury: This case reported to the professional as case #18 in March 1991 Report of the Discipline Committee Proceedings. Dr. Bayang had been found guilty by the Committee of charge of professional misconduct and of the allegation of incompetence       

Canada exercised independence strategy with Iran and Muslim. As the result, the numbers of Iranian from few hundreds increased to over two hundred thousand, and the numbers of Muslim increased to over one million. We are having confidence that the Constitution Act, 1982 is fully protecting all of us. Nguyen’s actions and the College’s Decision are outrageously dishonest and breaching ss. 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 15 and 24 of the Charter
having all rights under the law and the Charter to be served professionally. The service providers are obligated to consider the law, the ethical code, and dignity of all citizens as the fundamentals of the professional conduct, and the professional services.   
All parties have as solved in the telephone conference by all parties. Ms.  and the counsel for



September 29, 2006                                                                        SERVED

Abby Katz Starr, Registrar                                                             Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi 
Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (“Board”)                           456-608 College Street 
151 Bloor Street, West, 9th floor                                                             Toronto, ON, M6G 4A3
 Toronto, ON, M5S 2T5

File # 8615, Nourhaghighi v. Nguyen

Enclosed herewith is my “Submissions Record” in reply to your letters dated September 5 &11, 2006 sent by regular mail that I received on September 27.

Your letter of September 5th mailed on September 8th and had enclosure of Pre-Review Conference Report signed by Ms. Katie Osborne who sat today as the last day for me to serving you with my “Submissions Record” that addressing three main issues rose by Ms. Osborne:
a.         Grounds for confidentiality of the hearing;
b.         Fresh Evidence, and
c.         My Submissions       

I had only two days to complete my “Submissions Record”. You are well aware that this is not the first time that you, the Board and the Crown are prejudicing my rights 

Your letter of September 11th informed me that the Board is going to review my complaint on October 26, 2006, which is acceptable for me, and I will attend in person.
All my hope is that the members of Board on October 26 not be selected from those who harmed me by their scandalous decisions in past.


MAJOR KEYVAN NOURHAGHIGHI

I shall mention that a judge on October 2004 sat February 23, 2005 for hearing of my application for contempt proceeding against the board of my condominium (“Condo”), when the disobedience of the Orders by the Condo caused the growth of toxic moulds in the ceiling of my kitchen.  

For example for in Iran, Pakistan and Germany for genital and prostate examinations, I saw always a medical assistant beside physician who was performing the tests. I did not witness this safeguard in Canada. However, I was told that some hospitals exercise this safeguard only for women’s particular examinations. Canadian giving too much weight for sexual complaints made by women; and do not give any weight to men’s similar complaints





11.                                         


SUBMISSIONS RECORD Notice of Application; 04-cu-273627CM                          p.6

1.         In 1995 and 1996 I filed three actions against the College for not prosecuting the physicians who had disgraceful, dishonourable, unprofessional conduct, professional misconduct, failing to maintain the standard of practice and contravening the Acts2, 3, 4.  
As the result, the Crown and Police defendants in my actions, encouraged to continue improper influence over my medical services.
It is the Crown’s unlawful customary practice to attack to the parties acting against it that they fail to concentrate on their very limited time of presentations before judges. 


SUBMISSIONS RECORD Notice of Application; 04-cu-273627CM                          p.6

19             Major Nourhaghighi v. the Security Intelligent Review Committee (“SIRC”), CSIS and the Attorney General of Canada et al; T-762-04; see Lemieux Order
while ample ‘trial judges’ after careful examinations have made good judgments for me

The College1 is defendant in my three pending actions 2, 3, 4 for not prosecuting my complaints and other wrongdoings to cover up the crimes of the Crown
 was satisfied that the College, willfully, denied replying to me, and was rude to me in telephone conversations, to cause me mental anguish in critical time of February 2005.   
The Committee at M-9 indicates  

  
5.         On September 11, 2001 the US Government alleged that Muslim attacked them. The Crown8, the Courts 9, the federal 10, provincial 11, and municipal police 12 (“they”) used this opportunity and harshly attacked me and other Muslims inter alia Arar1, Ahani1, Soursh1. They used Nguyen as agent who abused his office and forwarded ample questions for discovery of my skill, experience, believe, expression, religion, and information. Nguyen searched my thought by entering into long political argument with me relating to 9/11. Then, they forwarded ample outrageously dishonest fabricated information against me to CSIS, RCMP and the Minister of Citizenship1 who suspended my landed status; forwarded the fabricated information to judges and dismissed all my legal proceedings and complaints; intercepted everywhere in Canada and US forcing me to return to Toronto; suspended my immigration landed status, and planned to deport me from Canada as the threat to the security of Canada under s.19 of the Citizenship Act & the Immigration Act. 
2              Arar v. Canada, Ahani v. Canada, Soursh v. Canada
1              Nourhaghighi v. Minister of Citizenship T-768-03
2              S