Лев Гунин - ГУЛаг Палестины

double-check request (see Document 21-b) it said "NIL ACTIVE". The film was evaluated by 3

medical doctors, which came to the same "nil active" conclusion. I was seen and evaluated by

2 medical doctors since October 29, who found the TB suspicion ridiculous.

Document 22

X-ray result from November 22 1994 from the Centre Hospitalier Reddy Memorial. On request

of W. Brzezinska, M.D. if there is recent pulmonary infiltrate it said "no recent pulmonary

infiltrate shown".

Document 23

Mr. Z. JAST's certificate for Immigration in relation to the x-ray dispute.

Document 24

Internet-links to two publications, which might accelerate persecutions.

Document 25-a,b

IMS final decision in my mother's case from Dec. 5 2000.

Document 26

Document 27

List of "civil" events. Relates to our will to contribute to the society.

Lev GUNIN December 2 2000 Montreal

COPY - DOCUMENT NUMBER ONE

To Immigration's Canada Complaint Board

(faxes: (780) 632-8101 (514) 283-8237) November 30 2000

From Lev GUNIN (514-499-1294)

This is the complaint on actions and decisions, which my advisers and I found inadmissible, like

attempts to cause damage to my mother's and my heath. Theoretically falsification and blatant

manipulation of medical data can lead to a forcible treatment from diseases, which one do not

have (it could be lethal).

.

I submit you 5 documents. The First is this one. Second is a complaint against refusal to allow

all my family members medical examinations half a year ago. Third is my disagreement with the

decision of Immigration Health Services from November 23, 2000. Fourth is a shortened

description of events, which manifested abuse of power, ungrounded secrecy, misconduct and

criminal manipulation of medical data. Fifth is a copy of a complaint made to Montreal Chest

Institute. Sixth is a wider description of events, with more astonishing and outraged details.

However, because of the length of the Sixth document its submission by fax could be found

offensive, so, please, tell me where to send it by post or e-mail.

I would like to know:

A) Who made all mentioned in six documents unjust decisions (names, position, what their role

in my file).

B) On what ground (law, paragraph, circumstances).

C) Who made a decision, based on a single x-ray: to consider me a potential TB carrier and

submitted it not to Mr. Giannakis, M.D. but to the Royal Victoria Hospital, depriving me and

doctor Giannakis of a minimal choice to choose where to turn for further evaluation. Is the MCI

radiology unit a part of IMS (ImmMedSrv)?

D) If the x-ray film (made at MCI) could be obtained for copying. My legal advisers and me - we

want to ask you to show it to us at 1010 St Antoine, Montreal. We want to check:

E) If a) there is any technical defect or underwear shadow, which was offensively interpreted

as "TB" b) this x-ray matches my body constitution c) an obviously normal result was blatantly

interpreted as "abnormal". We would like to be given a permission to take this film or its copy to

medical specialists to determine it.

F) How all contradictions, deceptions, violations can be explained (each event).

G) Examples: a) Half a year ago IMS officials refused to submit us ruling and forms for medical

examination for all family members assuring us that only my wife has to go through them. Now

in contradiction with what was said before they ordered my younger daughter and me (now

omitting my older daughter) to do examinations. B) Why my mother's file was illegally attached

to mine. c) How could so many ungrounded medical tests be ruled for my mother, keeping her

more then one year (!) in limbo, etc.

H) How all such decisions might be appealed?

I) Has my mother and me same IMS agents or agents of the same unit? Who are supervisors

of all agents, attached to our files (including Immigration Medical Services - IMS).

J) How to reach them?

K) If Immigration's agents (IMS included) are subjects of Criminal Code - or they are

completely uncontrolled and impunitive.

L) If they are not (impunitive) what is the way to complain about

1. Deliberate damage of my (my family's) financial, social, and psychological situation.

2. Criminal manipulation of the medical data

M) How could I know if W. Brzezinska's M.D. rapport with a "concern" about my health

presents not only in my mother's but in my file as well?

N) Why my file is proceeding not on Montreal - as normally - but in Ottawa?

I must warn you that I will contact police or RCMP in case of any further anonymous calls

("private call" indication) from Immigration and will disregard any letters, until they will not be

signed and carry the name and phone number of the person who is responsible for the

decision. All anonymous telephone calls, which accuse me of concealing a number of

infectious diseases, must be stopped. Anonymous letters from hospitals on behalf of

Immigration with same insinuations are unacceptable as well. I have also received a receipt for

a blood test for syphilis, which I never did, from a Lab, where I never went. I was also called by

two other laboratories, which pretend that I did tests for infectious diseases, and this is not

true. All such provocation must be stopped immediately!

.

All 5 (or 6) documents must be evaluated to consider and answer my complaint. Please,

answer all questions, which arise from the documents. I ask you to respond to this complaint in

writing. However, another solution is just to consider my case as "finished" with no further

demands. Will appreciate your cooperation.

Yours,

Lev GUNIN

November 30 2000

Chronology in GUNINS' case

November 1994

refugee claim

March 1997

refugee claim rejected.

(In the negative decision our refugee

claim description was severely

distorted; document includes such

direct and indirect statements as a)

nothing bad could happen in such a

beautiful country like Israel, b) people

who were taken to Israel for

Sochnut's expense are property of

Israel, c) people who refused to

change their believes and opinions

are guilty on persecutions themselves

because provoked them c) no

minimum of confidence). January

1998

- Federal Court closing our case on a

ridiculous ground of Immigration's "no

minimal confidence" ruling.

January 2000

- positive decision in response to our

humanitarian appeal.

March 2000

an interview lead to the Certificat de

selectione du Quebec issuing by

Quebec's Immigration

March 2000

bureaucratic humiliation and blatant

manipulation of medical data by

Federal Immigration starts to torpid

the completion of the case

Chronology in

Elisabetha GUNIN (Epstein's)

case:.1994

refugee claim + Wanda Brzezinska,

M.D. makes a false report (see Doc.

4b, 7a, 7b).

March 1997

refugee claim rejected.

January 1998

- Federal Court closing our case on a

ridiculous ground of Immigration's "no

minimal confidence" ruling.

November 1998

marriages a Canadian citizen

November 22 1999

my mother's marriage interview.

Nov. 23, Madame Helene ROY

replaces the initiative negative

decision, based on "medical

concerns" (dr. Brzezinska's rapport),

by a positive one.

January 2000 - Certificat de

selectione du Quebec was issued for

my mother.

January 2000, a ruling from IMS

ordering my mother additional tests:

strum creatinine (blood test) and

echocardiogram.

June 30, 2000 - IMS ridiculous

demand of a resume from "the last

visit to cardiologist".

July 27 2000

- rapport of Dr. Gordon Creenstein

(anatomy, not pathology) was

submitted to Immigration.

September 2000

another letter from IMS ordering

another urine test and then a visit to

an urologist.

September 19 2000

offensive letter from Immigration

officer. December 2000

IMS final negative decision confirming

the illegal prejudicial decision from

Nov. 99.

- DOCUMENT NUMBER TWO

To Immigration's Canada Complaint Board

(faxes: (780) 632-8101 (514) 283-8237)

From Lev GUNIN (514-499-1294)

A COPY OF DOCUMENT SUBMITTED TO IMMIGRATION

ON MAY 15 2000

By this letter we ask Immigration's agent assigned to my file to make a special ruling to order medical examinations for all members

of our family, not only for Alla GUNIN, my wife. As we know from our legal advisers, this procedure is required for all family members

for the landed immigrant's status. If you insist that only my wife has to do the medical examination, please, send us a written warrant.

We have a well-grounded suspicion that somebody might use the delay in ordering the medical examination for all members of our

family for artificial sabotage of issuing us the landed immigrant's status. We will appreciate your cooperation.

YOURS TRULY

Lev GUNIN

in name of family GUNIN

The 15 of May 2000

COPY - DOCUMENT NUMBER THREE

To Immigration's Complaints Board

(faxes: (780) 632-8101 (514) 283-8237) December 1 2000

From Lev GUNIN (514-499-1294)

I disagree with the Immigration Medical Services decision "ev 7001-850497Z" (with date mentioned: November 23, 2000) from

Ottawa, received by me on November 29, 2000 (anonymous - no name or signature). The goal of this ruling is not to establish the

medical truth but to put a hardship on my family (and me).

My arguments.

(See the decision's text - as it was red to me by dr. Giannakis - in Document N4: on the bottom)

1. The decision ruled that Mr. Giannakis's respond should be submitted before November 30, 2000. Why then the letter arrived only

on November 29? Does it mean that the date in the letter - "November 23" - was incorrect? Or the letter has not been sent in 2-3 days? Or - if it is known that a letter from Ottawa to Montreal goes 5-6 days - why then I was not given more time? I ask you to submit me an explanation what November 30 means and why not December 10 or January 15? I want to know how the agent justified that particular date. Was that small misconduct planned in advance?

2. The suggestion that somebody else went and did the x-ray instead of me was another serious assault. That suggestion was made in ignorance of the fact that on Clark Lab's official (original!) paper IMS (Immigration Medical Service) officer could see my name, date of birth, telephone number, name of the ordering physician, and the number of my medical card (which - everybody knows - has my photo on it). Besides, it mentioned the "MILD PECTUS EXCAVATUM", a cosmetic defect, which I have since birth. Besides, it is known that the film itself has a negative image of the whole ID data! Then this ungrounded abuse was based on nothing and went far beyond any medical or even legal matter.

3. The demand to send an original film from the November 14 x-ray in the light of two above disputed demands might be ungrounded. This x-ray film was already seen by 3 medical doctors: the radiologist at the Clark Lab, dr. Jast (who referred me and evaluated the film), and dr. Giannakis. All three came to a conclusion that there is NOTHING abnormal, not a slightest possibility.

Both dr. Jast and Giannakis also examined me. The official conclusion is NIL ACTIVE. Besides, it was informally evaluated by a chest specialist: with the same conclusion. What else the IMS agent needs? I have a well-grounded concern that 1) he/she will find a black spot even on the whitest paper - because he/she is determined to; and 2) after he/she will find "a black spot" the film will vanish, but not the IMS's "evaluation". Immigration pretended already many times (dates, documents might be provided) that lost our applications, medical data, etc.