article is outright slander, mystification, false insinuations and lie.. Before G. discovered that Mark Kotlarsky is the government agent he told
him some things which G. never told to any other person. But during our immigration hearing and during the hearing of family G. these
things were used by the immigration officer against us. We have no other explanation but that she's in a contact with Mr.Kotlarsky. 7)
Then, we have a reliable source of information which says that the immigration officer, the member of the immigration board in our cases, is
an Israeli. Because of some reasons we'd like not to present the evidences for that. But this paragraph can play an informative role only.
We have no pretensions to demand you to believe in that. From the other hand if the immigration officer is an Israeli (it can be confirmed, if
somebody wants to find out) and the patriot of Israel (the last is too clear), she has no moral and - may be - legal rights to judge in refugees'
from Israel cases.8)When G.'s came to Montreal they gave G.'s wife's birth certificate and it's legal translation to our lawyer. Dispute the
submission of that legal translation the lawyer's translator did her own translation. Now we discovered that she sabotaged ("refused") to
translate his wife's parents' nationality. There is a clear connection between that sabotage and the immigration officer's tactics in that
issue. The immigration court decision came to us at the 14 of December, 1996. The denial of our claim for a refugee status doesn't reflects
what really happened during our immigration hearings and has almost no connection with our claim. It is a masterpiece of rhetoric and
profanation. This document is a next proof that an only decisive voice in our case was the voice of the immigration officer. She was a real
judge - and the official judges were just mutes. The text of "their" negative decision reflects her style and based on her words exclusively:
Her declarations she made during our hearings are reflected in this document pretty good. But this document ignore our answers
completely: As if we kept silence all the time. When in reality some of our counterarguments completely discredited her insinuations.
Nothing what the judges said during our immigration hearing is reflected in the immigration board decision, what means that the decision to
deny our claim was made by the immigration officer only (without the judges) when according to the rules she has no decisive voice but only
a consultative voice. The denial's text is much the declaration about Israel then a statement of an immigration committee. It based on an
acsioma that Israel is a democratic state (society). Such a declaration lays beyond the juridical matter: Because there is not in jurisdiction of
an immigration board to decide which state is a democracy and which is not. This is a privilege of an academic institution but not of an
executive board. Then it is an act of injustice to declare that Israel is a democracy in an imperative manner giving the refugee claimants no
possibility to present their view and their counterarguments. It is clear from what was discussed during our immigration hearings that Israel
has almost nothing in common with democracy. A permission to leave the country, an indication of nationality and the country of origin in
special enternal passports, a supremacy of the religious laws over the civil code, a right for a military committee to decide who is a single
son - and who's not, an imprisonment for months without an official accusation: All these and hundreds of other Israeli laws are suitable
may be for a mental hospital - but not for a "democratic society". An opinion expressed by the document that we should not escape to
Canada but should seek a help in Israel also has nothing what to do with the reality. We did everything to defend ourselves in Israel, and G.
as a journalist and the human righta activist did everything that was possible to help us.He presented tenth of receipts of his complains to
various ministries and organizations including the Ministry of Police, the Ministry of internal affairs and police, which were unanswered, to
the immigration committee. The sad truth is that the committee just ignores everything. And recognize only the ungrounded Israel's
declarations. And the immigration officer - a person who sends faxes to Israeli embassy, obtains documents there;in other words who's in
tight connection with Israelis - is the only person who has a decidable voice in the refugees from Israel cases... Isn't that sad?!
We can not go back to Israel under no condition, because
1) my husband and my son may be arrested by the militaries and imprisoned. I expressed my grounded fears about that during the hearings
- and I can widen them now. 2) How can we go back to Israel if the immigration officer informed the Israelis about our refugee claim? In
