Censorship of the 90 kilos of cocaine seized in Calgary

I mentioned that someone wanted me to take down a 2 year old blog post about 90 kilos of cocaine that was seized in Calgary two years ago. Let's do a little detective work and figure out who was behind that censorship attempt and why. It might explain why the BC CFSEU don't make drug busts like they do in Ontario and other provinces.

The attached PDF is a series of emails I recently received from someone making a copyright claim claiming to represent Post Media News. I just included his initial request and each response he made to my responses. 

After his first email I asked if he was counsel and who he represented. He said he represented Post Media News and claimed one doesn't have to be counsel to make a copyright claim. Yes, but that's not what I asked. The tone was how a copyright lawyer speaks. Statements like "The infringing url." The whole tone sounded like he was at one time counsel. 

My first impression was Post Media News? I have an agreement with them. I won't post any of their pictures even if I provide a link to their article. Post Media News owns the Calgary Herald now? My bad. It's hard to keep up with all their acquisitions. I'll take it down. No problem. Yet that wasn't good enough. 

They started making crazy claims that I'm not even allowed to quote the article. In the original blog post I had simply quoted one sentence from the article. I put that sentence in quotations and provided a link to the original source. The following sentence simply summarized the article. Two sentences. That was it. The intent of the blog post was to send people to that news article and read it for themselves. 

Notwithstanding that fact, the person who claimed to represent Post Media News pulled a Mat Wilcox and claimed copyright on a quotation. I knew that was ridiculous and would not stand up in court but I thought ya know, I don't even want to waste my time on this. So I found another article about the Calgary cocaine seizure and quoted that instead. 

As soon as I did that, I immediately received an email from someone claiming to represent that other news outlet claiming copyright on that same article. At that point I knew this was bullsh*t. While this was going on, I noticed the obvious. I Googled his name and he had zero Internet presence. 

Everyone has an Internet presence especially if you represent Post Media News. You either have a law firm behind you or some other public relations agency. This guy had nothing. That was a red flag. I sent an email to my friend the ninja and said have you ever heard of a guy named Robert Grubbs? He claims to represent Post Media News on a copyright claim but he has no Internet presence. Everyone has an Internet presence. 

He writes back and says he's never heard of him and can't find him on Google. If he was involved with Corporate copyright, my friend the ninja would have heard of him. That's his thing. 

So I forward him some of the correspondence and said this sounds like a scam. The picture he claimed copyright to was a police handout. Post Media News didn't own the copyright to it. He lied. My friend the ninja writes back and says Gmail? This doesn't sound right. You should check with the Calgary Herald which I had already done. No response. 

So the guy was using a fake name, a fake email address, lied about representing Post Media News and lied about owning copyright to the picture. Yet it didn't sound like Blaze. I joked with the ninja and said maybe Blaze is using Chat GPT. 

In my last response included in the PDF I said I'm going to need to see some ID. I need to know who you are and proof that you do in fact represent Post Media News. Not a word since. 

However, as I said, as soon as I quoted and linked to an article about the cocaine seizure from a non Post Media News source, someone claiming to represent that other media source emailed me and made a copyright claim on that same article that no one reads. That was obviously too much of a coincidence to believe. That was definitely Blaze's MO. He always pretends to be someone he's not, making ridiculous claims. 

Yet again the wording of the request didn't sound like Blaze. The attached PDF shows the emails I received from them and my responses. Again when I demanded to see ID and proof of who he represented not a word after that. That is also Blaze's MO. He'll disappear after you catch  him in a lie. 

Third time's a charm. 9 times out of 10, when someone makes a copyright claim, it's not about copyright. They're trying to censor something. When I had the second set of fake emails about the Calgary cocaine bust I thought to myself what are they trying to censor? April 3rd I received an email from someone claiming to be Jason Jamie Chan about that same blog post. 

I simply asked them, let's see some ID. Blaze impersonates people all the time. I need to know who I am speaking with before I have a conversation with them. 

I'm all for giving people a second chance. My concern is that there has been so many lies and false claims about that post I want to know why. The BC CFSEU is a shameful disgrace. We need to address that before we censor that.

I also noticed that someone filed a copyright DMCA notice on April 19th 2025 to Goggle to have something removed from their search results. They are claiming copyright to a statement made in the second news article I linked to from Livewire Calgary.

This means Livewire Calgary did not make the complaint. Someone claimed ownership of a quote in the Calgary Live wire article I linked to. They claim the original work was found on Tumbler.com. OK this is getting bizarre. 

First we had someone falsely claim they represented Post Media News regarding an article published in the Calgary Herald. Then we had someone falsely claim they represent Livewire Calgary. Now we have someone falsely claiming to represent Tumbler regarding an article published on Calgary livewire. Two interesting things come up.

The text that they erroneously claim ownership of is "Staff Sgt. Mark Rahn with the Calgary Police Service Organized Crime Operations Unit said that this latest cocaine seizure was only nine kilograms less than the CPS had seized in all of 2022."

So they are specifically trying to censor the news article about the 90 kilos of cocaine seized in Calgary two years ago by making false claims. No one owns copyright to that statement. It was quoting a Calgary Police Service press release. 

So what we see here is a whole lot of fraud trying to censor a news article about a Surrey Jack being involved with a Calgary cocaine bust. Take a look at where the DMCA complaint claims to originate from - Hong Kong. Isn't that ironic?

Here is the Tumbler link the fraudster claims to be the original copyrighted work the Livewire Calgary article copied. It's from the 24scam-news-blog. ROFL.

That fake blog has three posts. The one it stole from Calgary Livewire as well as one before and one after that. The first post claims to have been published January 21st 2014.  

The second post copying the Calgary Livewire article claims to have been posted April 4th 2024 and the most recent post claims to have been posted February 24th 2025. They have obviously altered the dates of the blog posts. 

That's someone going through a whole lot of trouble and committing a whole lot of fraud, just to censor one news article about 90 kilos of cocaine seized in Calgary en route to Surrey.

Oh wow. Adam Jones has recently made multiple DMCA complaints regarding that same article. They also want Google to remove from their index an article about the Calgary cocaine bust found in the Western standard news.

Oh my. On March 29th 2025 that same Adam Jones filed a DMCA complaint against boyfriendtv.com. He claims "It was nude content that I have taken down from stripchat." Yo man, that's a little TMA. On March 23 2025 he did another. On March 27 2025 he did another. On March 29 2025 he did yet another. 

So in April (Charles) Adam Jones filed two bogus DMCA complaints about the Calgary cocaine news article. In March he flied 4 DMCA complaints about pictures or videos he posted on stripchat being posted elsewhere. Then he files a whole bunch of DMCA complaints about models in their company. 

On the two DMCA complains he filed about the Calgary news article he claimed he was from Hong Kong. On all the other DMCA complaints he filed he claimed he was from the US except for the February 14 2024 one where he claims he's from Canada. 

This article claims that "Levin Law Firm has been known to represent travel and nature photographer Charles Adam Jones and send letters on his behalf." Can I say that? Please advise.