Paul Fromm’s Edmund Burke Society was a National Police operation under Soviet Agent Pearson and Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Part II)

Part II:
The Fromm-Proos attack on Alan Stang
1971

PART I is here.


Referring to Alan Stang’s article in the April 1971 American Opinion (“Canada How The Communists Took Control”), Fromm’s writer, Januus Proos, says:

“A telegram, reproduced on the article’s centerfold, reputed to have been sent by Jean-Louis Gagnon is an outright forgery.  A similar telegram was sent but not this one.  Which brings up the point, that by carelessly using false information that can be disproved, Stang has afforded the enemy the opportunity to discredit the remaining 99% fact in the article.”

However, Proos did not go on to “disprove” the reality of the telegram that Stang had published “in the centerfold”.  Nor did Proos “disprove” any other facts alleged by Stang, including the fact that Pearson had been outed to the FBI as a Soviet agent by Elizabeth Bentley, defecting from Soviet military intelligence.

Why did Proos say “A similar telegram was sent but not this one”?  Why did Proos not disprove the alleged Stang “forgery” by noting that Straight Talk! itself had published the real telegram sent by Gagnon, also in April 1971.  Why not say, here’s the real one!  We published it!

Perhaps because EBS readers might have noticed the one Fromm had published is identical to the one Stang had published that Proos called an “outright forgery”.

if we are to believe Proos that Stang published an “outright forgery”, something that Proos and Fromm certainly would not do (right?), Fromm would have published the REAL telegram, or else, the consequence, according to Proos denouncing Stang, would be to DISCREDIT “the remaining 99% fact”, and this time, not merely in a single article, but in the whole of the supposedly expert anti-communist journal of Paul Fromm, StraightTalk!

So, either Fromm’s EBS published the same “forgery”; and both telegrams are “outright forgeries”, or both telegrams are authentic, and Proos and Fromm had falsely accused Alan Stang of publishing a forgery.  In fact, the latter is the case.  Fromm and Proos lied about Stang.  What would the effect be of that kind of a lie?  It would discredit Stang and drive him off Canadian turf, where the Communist operation has long been well underway on the street, and inside government.

Fromm and Proos published an authentic May-Day Telegram by Soviet agent Jean-Louis Gagnon.  It’s absolutely identical to the one that Stang published.  We will see this clearly down below with a line-by-line graphic demonstration, proving that Stang did not publish a forgery.

It happens that in 1971, the original author of the telegram, known Soviet agent Jean-Louis Gagnon, was employed by Pierre Trudeau in Information Canada; as noted by Stang who points to Gagnon’s pro-Soviet May-Day telegram.

Stang correctly observes the high concentration of communist agents in the federal government of Canada, including Pierre Trudeau, Jean-Louis Gagnon, and Lester Bowles Pearson himself, outed by Bentley in the U.S. McCarran hearings.

Stang planned a mass-mailing to warn Canadians of a Communist takeover from the top-down, inside the federal government of Canada.

That mass-mailing was a threat to Fromm’s main boss, Lester Pearson, for whom Canada’s national police had recruited F. Paul Fromm to set up the Edmund Burke Society as a national surveillance and police front in February of 1967.

That mass-mailing was a threat as well to Pierre Elliott Trudeau, another Communist who jointly bossed Canada’s national police with Pearson, and who therefore also was Paul Fromm’s boss.  Stang’s planned mass-mailing was a threat to the top-down Communist operation in Canada.

Surely, Stang had to be frightened away.  Falsely accusing him of publishing a forgery, while telling him to stick to his own side of the border, was the public method chosen.

To prove to you that Fromm published the same telegram that Stang published in April 1971, I will compare the two published telegrams and you can see for yourself that they are identical.

Here is the May-Day Telegram of Communist Party member, Jean-Louis Gagnon, published by Fromm top-right on page 7 of Straight Talk! in April, 1971 (Volume III, No. 7):

Straight Talk!
April, 1971 (Volume III, No. 7)

The Telegram published by Straight Talk! in April 1971


The Telegram published by Fromm, top-right on page 7
of Straight Talk!  in April 1971, Volume III, No. 7.

“The Red Red Record of Trudeau's Propaganda Minister” (Jean-Louis Gagnon)

“The Red Red Record of Trudeau’s Propaganda Minister” (Jean-Louis Gagnon), Straight Talk!, April 1971


The picture of the telegram in Straight Talk! with a caption under it, isolated on a page by itself, is a clumsy way to begin a cover story on the infamous May-Day Telegram of Jean-Louis Gagnon, praising the “Great Soviet Union”.  The caption (the fine print) begins the story, which continues in larger dark print in the middle of the page, and then says “continued page 8)”.

The bottom-third of page 8 begins:  “(THE RED, RED RECORD OF TRUDEAU’S MINISTER OF PROPAGANDA, continued from page 7)”.  The expose says “Former R.C.M.P. undercover agent, Pat Walsh, knew Gagnon was the right-hand man in Quebec to Soviet spy and former member of Parliament, Fred Rose.”  And it goes on to end in the top-fourth of page 9.

Indeed, Pat Walsh, in his 1982 pamphlet, “Inside the Featherbed File? Canada’s Watergate, The Story of Treason in Ottawa“, in the segment “Comintern Penetrates Federal Civil Service” says:

“… the Royal Commission Report dealing with Soviet espionage in the ’40s revealed that other Soviet spies active in the External Affairs Department had either fled the country (Jean-Louis Gagnon fled to Brazil, with the cooperation of Mitchell Sharp, then a director of Brazilian Traction Corporation) or could not be positively identified because only their code names were known.”

See, also, “The Jean-Louis Gagnon Case” in that same article.

 

The Telegram from Straight Talk!, enlarged

The telegram published by Fromm as authentic:

The Telegram published by Straight Talk! in March 1971

The Telegram published by Straight Talk! in March 1971


The Telegram from American Opinion, enlarged

The telegram published by Stang as authentic:

The Telegram published by Stang in American Opinion, also in April 1971

THE TELEGRAM PUBLISHED BY STANG IN AMERICAN OPINION IN APRIL 1971

Above is the May Day Telegram of Communist Jean-Louis Gagnon published by Alan Stang in American Opinion top-left on page 14 in April, 1971.

The Telegram Stang published in April 1971 — denounced by Fromm and Proos as being an “outright forgery” — is in fact part of the April 1971 cover story of Paul Fromm’s Straight Talk! while Fromm is the editor.  Fromm is responsible for publishing this Telegram as authentic to denounce Jean-Louis Gagnon as a Soviet agent.

The bill for the Alan Stang offprint.

The bill for the Alan Stang offprint.

For the best possible comparison, I purchased a clean copy of Stang’s Canada story as an American Opinion offprint and had it shipped in order to scan the original flat to the glass.  The only partial copy online had not been scanned flat.  This aids the comparison of the telegram published by Fromm in March 1971 with the telegram published by Stang in April 1971.

Above-left is the bill for the offprint.  Fromm, who is outed by me as a Communist agent working to overthrow Canada (we’ll see a few of his efforts in Part III of this article), can come and shoot me.  My address is right on the bill, the bill is authentic.  Invoice by Willis Monie – Books, 139 Main Street, Cooperstown, NY 13326.  Date of invoice 10/29/19.  “Stang – Canada”.  Amount: $5.00, Shipping: $10.00, Total: $15.00.

Robert E. Updike (signature) on Stang's ““Canada” offprint, 1971

Robert E. Updike (signature) on Stang’s ““Canada” offprint, 1971

The particular offprint once belonged to Robert E. Updike, whose signature was on the cover (see above).  The original offprint has been donated to the Quebec Archives.  I removed the signature from the scan of the “Canada” offprint online here, at the present web site.  And that is all I removed.

The Telegram in the centerfold of Stang’s
“Canada” offprint (top-left) April 1971

The Telegram, top-left in the double-page spread in the center-fold of Stang's Canada offprint of April 1971.

The Telegram, top-left in the double-page spread in the center-fold of Stang's Canada offprint of April 1971.

The Telegram, top-left in the double-page spread in the center-fold of Stang’s Canada offprint of April 1971.[/caption]

Preparing to compare the Stang and Fromm Telegrams

First, here’s how I prepared the two publications of the Telegram to prove they are one and the same.  I purchased a clean copy of Alan Stang’s CANADA How The Communists Took Control and scanned the Telegram.  I sized the scan to match a print-screen of the same Telegram in Straight Talk! online at archive.org, taken from the scan made by the Thomas Fisher Rare Books Library.  The Fisher describes itself at archive.org:  “The Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library is a library in the University of Toronto, constituting the largest repository of publicly accessible rare books and manuscripts in Canada.”

I put both copies of the Telegram into MovieMaker in Windows XP Pro and used an automatic “wipe” transition with a red bar to gradually reveal one telegram, line by line, overlaid on the other.  I save the video, then I shot stills from the video and assembled them as a gif in ulead gif animator (free edition: it’s quirky, but it works).  You can thus read the two telegram images one line at a time, top to bottom, to see for yourself that the telegrams are identical.

After scanning the Stang pamphlet, I donated the original to the Quebec Archives, whose rare books department gladly accepted it as an authentic original offprint.  Mr. Daniel Chouinard, Librarian in charge of acquisitions over on 2275 Holt Street in Montreal, acknowledged receipt in email, on 11/11/2019, in French, as follows:

“RE: Alan Stang, CANADA How The Communists Took Control (1971)

Bonjour Madame,

J’ai bien reçu l’exemplaire de la brochure intitulée Canada : How the Communists Took Control.

Je vous remercie de ce don qui contribuera à enrichir notre collection.

Cordiales salutations.

Daniel Chouinard
Bibliothécaire
Direction du dépôt légal et des acquisitions
Direction générale de la Bibliothèque nationale
Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec

2275, rue Holt
Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1

Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3740
Sans frais : 1 800 363-9028
Télécopieur : 514 873-7286
daniel.chouinard@banq.qc.ca
http://www.banq.qc.ca”

Translation:  “I received the copy of the brochure entitled Canada: How the Communists Took Control. / Thank you for this donation which will contribute to enriching our collection.”

Canada: How the Communists Took Control, Alan Stang, 1971

Canada: How the Communists Took Control, Alan Stang, 1971

The document is now in the BAnQ’s catalogue, with the words “en traitement” bottom-left.  That’s French for “it’s being processed” to make it publicly available in the collection.  The words above that, “Grande Bibliothèque – Collection nationale – Livres” mean the “book” or document is in the Rare Books Division, through this portal:

The Quebec Archives, entrance to special collections, rare books and government documents

The Quebec Archives, entrance to special collections, rare books and government documents

We now can be sure we are looking at “Stang’s” copy of the telegram from an actual, meaning authentic, copy of American Opinion.
 

Now, let’s compare them.

EBS white telegram on top of Stang grey telegram

I will lay the EBS (white) telegram over the Stang (grey) telegram, and then remove the white one, a line at a time, to reveal the grey one, proving both are identical.

The scan of the Stang Telegram is grey to aid comparison.  The animated gif below gradually exposes Stang’s grey telegram by removing Fromm’s white telegram laid over it.

You can therefore see, the Telegrams are identical.

There is no doubt Paul Fromm as editor of Straight Talk in April 1971, published an outright lie by Januus Proos while accusing Alan Stang of publishing “an outright forgery”:  for, if Stang published a “forgery”, then so did Paul Fromm.

 

The Telegram:  Stang -vs- Fromm

Top-down wipe done in Moviemaker in XP Pro

The Fromm-Stand Telegrams - Animated Comparison

The Fromm-Stand Telegrams – Animated Comparison


Fromm and Proos lied savagely

Fromm and Proos lied savagely, even risking exposure of their own publication of the same Telegram, to avert Stang’s mass-mailing that might have exposed Canada’s top-down Communist operation.

Fromm, himself, would also have been exposed as one of their agents.
 

Q.:  Why was Fromm concerned about
Stang’s mass-mailing?

A.:  It would have been a Big Success!

Let me return you to my wrap-up of PART I of this multi-part article on FROMM and the EBS as a national police front under Soviet Agent Pearson and Communist PIerre Elliott Trudeau.  Click that link and scroll down to read my sum-up entitled “CONCLUSION – Part I”, where I prove to you that a prior mass-mailing by Ron Gostick, in which FROMM himself participated with the EBS, was a massive success.

And that is why F. Paul FROMM, and his writer Janus PROOS, smeared American patriot ALAN STANG in Straight Talk! in 1971:  to prevent a similar “major conservative grass-roots upsurge” and a top-down clean-out of the communist-penetrated federal government of Canada, including the exposure of little red FROMM, himself.

F. Paul Fromm, who set up the Edmund Burke Society as a police front for Soviet agent Lester Bowles Pearson, and who also worked for Communist mole Pierre Elliott Trudeau, and reported to Trudeau’s red Solicitor General of Canada in charge of the national police and national security of Canada, Jean-Pierre Goyer from December 22, 1970 to November 26, 1972, is a Communist agent.

As V.I. Lenin said:  “We’ll run our own opposition”.

F. PAUL FROMM is controlled opposition.

F Paul Fromm, Communist Agent

F Paul Fromm, Communist Agent


 
… To be continued.
 

A Look back at a revolutionary past: Gilles Duceppe, Marxist-Leninist-Maoist (Communist)

This French video has English subtitles.
Cette vidéo française est sous-titrée en anglais.

ALSO SEE IT ON BITCHUTE / A VOIR AUSSI SUR BITCHUTE:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/jGREADNkEUtb/

The importance of this bit of film is that it illustrates the communist background of Gilles Duceppe.

Duceppe is apparently one of those unwilling “to talk” to the journalists in this film about their revolutionary past in Quebec.

Perhaps Duceppe is not so much embarrassed about his communist past, as wary of disclosing his communist present as the leader of the federal BLOC QUEBECOIS. (The film was made in 1999.)

In collaboration with the international banks and the multinational corporations, Gilles Duceppe was working toward the North American Union, a continental or regional union that communists would support under the planned world government that is just around the corner as I write today.

The BLOC QUEBECOIS was the federal counterpart of the PARTI QUEBECOIS. We were all told the PQ was “separatist” and wanted “sovereignty” for Quebec.

We were told the BLOC supported the efforts of the PQ to help Quebec “secede”.

We were lied to. The PARTI QUEBECOIS is not separatist nor is it sovereignist. It is communist. The two referendums it ran in 1980 and in 1995 were not for Quebec independence. The real agenda is hidden in plain view under the labels: “Sovereignty Association” (1980) and “Sovereignty Partnership” (1995).

The goal of the PQ and of the BLOC is not for Quebec to “secede” to become a “nation”, but to con the people into voting YES in order to force the “rest of Canada” to dismantle itself in the so-called “negotiations”. So-called because the outcome is already planned: Canada is to be dismantled and converted to the top half of a REGIONAL UNION on the European model.

A dismantled Canada will first produce a string of new provincial “nations”. These will be re-federated into a REGION using treaties on the European model.

These new provincial “nations”, being supposedly “sovereign”, will then choose to decentralize their legislative powers. That means they will SHARE out or RE-DISTRIBUTE their new-found total powers to the new global institutions: the international city-states, the regional government (first over the continent, then over the western hemisphere) and then, the world government.

Canada will be converted to a regional union; it will form the top half of the North American Union; Quebec “secession” will trigger an equally planned “domino effect” as the American States, whether some, many or all, declare UDI (“independence”) and join the parade of decentralization on the way to powerlessness under a communist world government.

RENE LEVESQUE, a believer in world government, and in the end of the nation-state (as he openly states in his Memoirs, but nobody ever notices, least of all the voters), organized and founded the PQ to run the referendums to dismantle Canada into multi-cultural city-states in the North American Union under a communist world government. He took his marching orders in this respect from a “secret committee” of FEDERAL MINISTERS from Quebec in the cabinet of prime minister and Soviet agent LESTER BOWLES PEARSON.

RENE LEVESQUE actually fought the NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF CANADA (NDP) in the early 1980s for for access of the PQ to membership in the SOCIALIST INTERNATIONAL (SI) whose two planks were and are 1) world government and 2) industrial democracy.

What is industrial democracy? It’s an innocuous name for communism, the brand of communism developed in the former Yugoslavia under Marshal Tito. It was better known there as workers’ control or workers’ self-management.

In 1970, in Canada, the notorious Praxis Research Institute published conference proceedings calling industrial democracy “the true heir of Karl Marx”. So, you are, absolutely, talking about communism with the PARTI QUEBECOIS and the BLOC.

Thus, when Gilles Duceppe led the BLOC QUEBECOIS all those years in Ottawa, he wasn’t working on Quebec independence, he wasn’t backing up Quebec “secession”. He was working on using Quebec to dismantle Canada for North American Union, a communist regional union. He was using Quebec to force the “rest of Canada” to “negotiate” its own demise by dismantling into international city-states in a communist world-state.

In the film above, the journalists feel they are looking at a “revolutionary past” in Quebec, including Gilles Duceppe’s revolutionary past. As though he were a “former” Marxist-Leninist-Maoist. But Duceppe was always a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, especially while leading the BLOC QUEBECOIS in the federal parliament to overthrow Canada for North American Union and a one-world government.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION & SUBTITLES
by “WHO DARES WINS”
The Official Legal Challenge
To North American Union
http://www.habeascorpuscanada.com

http://www.NOSNOWINMOSCOW.net

Paul Fromm’s Edmund Burke Society was a National Police operation under Soviet Agent Pearson and Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Part I)

Who is F. Paul Fromm?

This article will attempt to figure that out.  To that end, I ask:  If an organization is set up as a police front, isn’t whoever set it up working for the police?  And for those behind the police?  Who, in this case, happen to be Communists.

The answer to the question turns on whether or not the tactics of the EBS in May of 1971 were intended to protect Soviet Agent Lester Bowles Pearson, and the whole federal government apparatus in Canada from a communist clean-out.
 

Part I:
The Edmund Burke Society:  A Police Front.
A Police Front of the Communist-Penetrated
Federal Government


Alleged Policy of the EBS
F. Paul Fromm

Paul Fromm – His Edmund Burke Society was a national police operation under Lester Bowles Pearson

“One of the cardinal principles adopted by the EDMUND BURKE SOCIETY from its very foundation was that we would co-operate with other conservative and anti-communist groups.  We might feel that other groups might be too wishy-washy, too outspoken, poorly informed, or participating in dead-end causes or activities.  We vowed that we would seek to co-operate with such groups in areas of common interest.  We would not spend our time in fratricidal bickering and hair-splitting.  The fight against our strong and common enemy is far more important than petty differences as to method or personality.”

— By F. Paul Fromm, B.A., writing in “Only Pawns in their Game“, Straight Talk!, Volume III, Number 1, September 1970

 
That principle is echoed throughout the issues that Fromm edited.  But, notwithstanding this nobly phrased sentiment, Fromm as editor of Straight Talk!, “The Official Bulletin of the Edmund Burke Society”, and his writer Jaanus Proos, in their May 1971 issue, viciously attacked American anti-communist Allan Stang with lies bordering on slander, and mealy-mouthed tactics of the kind typically used to silence valid information exposing Communists.  In other words, these “free-speechers” lied about Stang and defamed him to squelch him.

Is God a Racist? Stanley R. Barrett

The fundamental assumption in Barrett’s book is that it is an outrage for “White” people to try to prevent their own extinction.

The Edmund Burke Society, according to left-wing author-professor Stanley R. Barrett, was a national security and police front set up in 1967 by more than one national security agency of Canada. Not mentioned by Barrett is the fact that Lester Bowles Pearson was then prime minister and Canada’s national police report directly to the prime minister and to the Justice department.

Also not mentioned, Barrett may not have known, Pearson was a Soviet agent exposed in the U.S. McCarran hearings and to the FBI by Elizabeth Bentley, while defecting from Soviet military intelligence, the GRU.  The U.S. McCarran hearings followed and were prompted by the Gouzenko spy trials in Canada.  Those “spy trials” left many questions unasked, and many spies untried, as three successive prime ministers put a squelch on most of the Gouzenko materials.  Those three prime ministers were Freemason John George Diefenbaker; Soviet agent Lester Bowles Pearson; and Communist Pierre Elliott Trudeau.  As of this writing, there is no indication the squelch was ever lifted.  Download the “Forerunners” segment of Is God A Racist?; it contains the grudging admission of Barrett that Fromm’s EBS was a national police front.

At the time of the Fromm-Proos attack on Stang, in May of 1971, the EBS would have been controlled by national police reporting to Communist Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau and to Trudeau’s red Solicitor General (who also reported to Trudeau) Jean-Pierre Goyer.  In his April 1971 “Canada” exposé, Stang profiled Mr. Goyer:

Another thing you need if you are imposing a dictatorship is control of the police.  In Canada, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are controlled by the Solicitor-General.  So Trudeau made Jean-Pierre Goyer the Solicitor-General — when Parliament was not in session and could not question him.  Goyer, it goes without saying, was a regular contributor to Cité Libre. [Trudeau’s pro-Soviet review.]  Isn’t everybody?  He was once arrested for staging a sit-in outside the office of the Premier of Quebec.  He has been involved in several pro-Communist fronts.  And he has attended Communist meetings behind the Iron Curtain.  Like his friend Trudeau, he is a revolutionary.

This is the man now running the national police of Canada.

This is the man who is the “Boss” of the Edmund Burke Society when Proos attacks Allan Stang in May of 1971 to discredit Stang’s intended exposure of Soviet agent Pearson.

In fact, Fromm-Proos buffered their attack on Stang by admitting (an apparent tactic) the truth of Stang’s write-up on reds in the federal government, including  his exposé on their own secret boss, Goyer:

“Nevertheless, against these disadvantages, Stang has put together a commendable summary, covering the highly questionable backgrounds of Trudeau, Gagnon, Goyer, the F.L.Q., Praxis Corporation, and the “peace” Movement; dealing with facts long familiar to regular readers of STRAIGHT TALK!”

But, why the attack on Stang?  Stang and the John Birch Society planned a mass-mailing to Canadians to expose communist Pearson.

That Canadian mass-mailing intended by Stang and the JBS who published Stang’s Canada article in American Opinion in April 1971, is the target of paragraph one of the Fromm-Proos assault on Stang in the May 8th, 1971 issue of Straight Talk!, Volume III,Number 8.  Said Proos, with F. Paul Fromm, B.A. as Editor and Kastuś Akula, by the way, Associate Editor:

In the April issue of AMERICAN OPINION, the John Birch Society’s monthly publication, there was a 27-page article titled “CANADA: How the Communists took control”.  Its author, Alan Stang, diagnosed Canada to be in the same position today as Cuba was after the Castro takeover in 1959.  In its missionary zeal, the U.S.-based Birch Society has undertaken to warn the Canadian people of the impending disaster via a mass-mailing (around 100,000 copies) of the article to professionals and businessmen in Canada.  The scheme is to be financed through $25,000 raised in Canada and a like amount drawn from J.B.S. funds.

That mailing is what Fromm and Proos were afraid of.  The effect of their attack on Stang could only protect  Pearson from 100,000 letters to Canadians that would have exposed him as a Communist.  Imagine the inquiry and the federal clean-up that might have ensued in Canada if that mailing had been done.  Not only Pearson, but Goyer, Trudeau and the rest of the appointed and elected Reds would have been outed.

Moreover, Fromm had set up the Edmund Burke Society as a national police front under Communist Lester Pearson, thus, the attack on Stang to halt the mass-mailing spared Fromm and his EBS from exposure as faux “conservative” tools of the same band of Communists.

Jean-Pierre Goyer

Jean-Pierre Goyer was Solicitor General of Canada from Dec. 22, 1970 to Nov. 26, 1972

Jean-Pierre Goyer was Solicitor General of Canada from December 22, 1970 to November 26, 1972, in charge of the national police and national security of Canada.  Those were the national police agencies (plural) who set up the Edmund Burke Society in 1967 under Pearson and Goyer’s predecessors; Goyer himself reports to Communist Pierre Trudeau at the time Proos and Fromm attack anticommunist Alan Stang to protect Pearson — and the whole federal level — from a mailing to expose the Communists.

Obviously, Mr. Goyer was in charge of the “security” of the undisclosed Communists (and their handlers, the multinationals and the international bankers) who had (and still have) their grip on Canada.

Brian Ruhe has titled a filmed interview with Paul Fromm:  “Brian Ruhe & Paul Fromm: Jews Created the Canadian Nazi Party in 1965”.  The two parts of the film online, labeled part 1 of 1 and part 2 of 2, don’t actually deal with that subject, perhaps the middle was cut out that explains how the Jews supposedly did it.  But Fromm at the end of the film agrees with Ruhe that he likes the title “Brian Ruhe & Paul Fromm Jews Created the Canadian Nazi Party in 1965.”

By the end of part 2, Fromm states the Canadian Jewish Congress founded the Nazi party, and then eventually destroyed it, and that it was done as a pretext to pass hate-speech laws in Canada.  Fromm offers no details as to the modus operandi  of the Jews in setting up their little Nazi party.

We do know, from Adrien Arcand writing in 1965 in DOWN WITH HATE! that the royal commission on hate propaganda was a vehicle of the Canadian Jewish Congress; and that the CJC’s ex-president on that Hate committee, “Mr. Saul Hayes, Q.C., of the CJC”, made some enigmatic statements in a CJC publication concerning the Vatican Council II and the consequent future of Communism.  Devout Catholic Adrien Arcand wrote:

M. Hayes est aussi écrivain, à l’occasion.  L’été dernier, il faisait publier sa prose en première page du “Bulletin du Cercle Juif, organe officiel français du Congrès Juif Canadien.  L’occasion de son intervention littéraire était importante, il s’agissait de nous faire savoir ce que lui ou le CJC pensait du Concile Oecuménique Vatican II.  Entre autres considérations et conclusions du grand événement mondial, M. Saul Hayes écrivait donc (No. de juillet-août 1964):

Mr. Hayes is also a writer, on occasion.  Last summer, he published his prose on the front page of the “Bulletin du Cercle Juif“, the official French organ of the Canadian Jewish Congress.  The motive of his literary intervention was important, it was to let us know what he or the CJC thought of the Ecumenical Council of Vatican II.  Among other considerations and conclusions from the great world event, Mr. Saul Hayes wrote (July-August issue, 1964):

Dans de telles conditions, la civilisation occidentale et chrétienne ne peut plus dominer le monde et le catholicisme doit faire face à de nouvelles forces tels (sic) que le communisme et l’athéisme”.

In such conditions, Western and Christian civilization can no longer dominate the world and Catholicism must confront new forces like Communism and atheism”.

I know from my own research that the other CJC ex-president on the Hate Committee, Maxwell Cohen, was a pro-red Zionist; according to a brief to the federal government in 1956, Cohen was paid to smear Senator Joseph McCarthy by the Canadian CBC and various publications.  That news comes from Ron Gostick, with whom Fromm claims to have been associated.  Thus, the royal committee on hate propaganda seems to have been a vehicle of pro-Communist Jews.  All the more so, if Judaism cannot be separated from Communism, the latter being a device of the former to achieve the aims of the Talmud.  Please read Arcand.

Now, if Mr. Fromm is willing to say that the Jews set up Canada’s Nazi party in 1965; he cannot then deny the viability of the accusation quoted by Barrett that he himself set up the Edmund Burke Society as a national police front (more below).  Nor the observation by me that he did it under Soviet agent Lester Bowles Pearson as his primary employer, and therefore that Paul Fromm and his EBS were a conduit for communist moles, and merely pretended to attack the Communists.

LEFT-WING AUTHOR STANLEY BARRETT
GRUDGINGLY OUTS THE EBS AS A POLICE FRONT

Author Stanley R. Barrett, in his book, Is God a Racist?, describes the founding of the Edmund Burke Society (EBS), which he says at pages 70-71 was set up as a national police front via campus security.  There is a copy of some of the book in google books online.  It was originally published in 1987 by the University of Toronto Press.  I got myself a used paperback from Amazon for about two bucks, ISBN 0-8020-6673-9; I have a 1989 reprint. You can download the extract, “Forerunners”.  Here are the relevant excerpts:
 

1 – BARRETT ON THE ABOVE-GROUND (VISIBLE) FOUNDING OF THE EBS:

/ 49

“In February 1967 three young men sat around a counter at a coffee shop in Toronto’s Lord Simcoe Hotel.  They had just attended a meeting of the Canadian Alliance for Free Enterprise (CAFE), an organization inspired by the conservative writings of Ayn Rand.  The shared view of the three men was that CAFE was a ‘talk group’.  They believed, in contrast, that the danger of communism and the disintegration of Western society demanded action.   The upshot was the decision to establish a new organization, one that could canalize ‘militant conservative activism.’  In this way was born The Edmund Burke Society.

The three founding members were Donald Andrews, Paul Fromm, and Leigh Smith, at the time public-health inspector, University of Toronto student, and secondary-school teacher respectively.  Although all three were solidly middle class, their backgrounds were quite different, as were their eventual right-wing careers.  Andrews, born in Yugoslavia, came to Canada under circumstances that can only be described as poignant.  His father, a partisan during the Second World War, had been killed by German soldiers.  His mother married a Canadian serviceman and emigrated to Canada, leaving behind her son, whose whereabouts were unknown.  Finally, she located him, with the help of the Red Cross, and at the age of about ten Canada became his new home.  Fromm, whose father was an accountant for an oil company, was born in Colombia [Bogota], although his ancestry is French Canadian and German.  Only Smith was born in Canada, the youngest of a large family in Quebec.”

 

2. BARRETT RE THE SITE OF OPERATIONS OF THE EBS (U of T CAMPUS):

/ 53

“There is little doubt that the college campuses, especially the University of Toronto, were the center of Edmund Burke Society activity, and that the man of the hour was Paul Fromm.”

 

3 – BARRETT ON THE REALITY OF THE EBS AS A POLICE FRONT:

/ 70

“I now turn to a rather sensitive issue:  the possible involvement of the police in establishing the Edmund Burke Society.  In 1982 while carrying out research in British Columbia, I came across a document that threw quite a different light on this organization.  According to the document, the Edmund Burke Society was actually set up as an instrument for Canada’s security services in order to draw out the left wing and crystallize its right-wing opposition.  The kingpin behind all this was supposedly a military man, trained at one point by a CIA anti-subversive squad, who had been active in university-campus security for the armed forces in the late 1960s.  Working along with him was a ‘red squad,’ a common term in police circles for a group of people organized and trained to infiltrate organizations, act as agents provocateurs, and generally undermine the left wing by various ‘dirty tricks.’

How serious [sic] should one take these charges?  At the outset it must be pointed out that most of the information in the document consists of the speculations of a man who had been fired from the Central Housing and Mortgage Corporation for allegedly showing a cabinet document to the Native Council of Canada (he later won a court case for wrongful

/ 71

dismissal).  It could reasonably be argued that this man had no reason to love the state bureaucracy.  And yet, there is a great deal of circumstantial evidence that lends plausibility to his accusations.  There are, for example, newspaper reports of his dismissal and trial, as well as the military man’s role in campus security.  Several of those said to belong to the ‘red squad’ were, indeed, members of the Edmund Burke Society.  Moreover, I know for a fact that at least two of them have over the years been police informers.  Finally, the document itself was submitted to an inquiry about the RCMP by a Progressive Conservative MP.  If the charges in the document are fanciful, the person who prepared it should be congratulated for his imaginative powers.  However, if the RCMP and other police agencies did not control the Edmund Burke Society behind the scenes, perhaps there will be someone in the top echelons asking:  why not?!”

Note the activity here:  “According to the document, the Edmund Burke Society was actually set up as an instrument for Canada’s security services in order to draw out the left wing and crystallize its right-wing opposition.”  Our Communist-occupied federal government appointed Fromm to “crystallize” and “draw out” two opposing sides.  Note that Fromm’s career will be occupied in efforts to “crystallize” and “polarize” two more opposing sides:  the “Rest of Canada” (in the form of political parties opposed to Quebec) … in order to “negotiate” the dismantling of Canada with the red political party created in Quebec by the Pearson fed in 1967, meaning, necessarily, the North American Union; because the reds are aiming for decentralization of the nation-state into city-states, Communist  multicultural city-state regions under a one-world government).

Barrett concludes in the middle of the next section:

“[…] the Edmund Burke Society’s significance should not be underrated; it provided the training ground for the two principal figures who were to dominate the scene during the years ahead:  Andrews on the far right and Fromm on the fringe right.”

The fact that Barrett did not footnote this material — obviously to protect his “right-wing” “racist” theory — adds credibility to the allegations.  His theory being, in the chapter “Forerunners”, that the tiny Canadian Nazi party (1965) and Fromm’s Edmund Burke Society (1967) were grass-roots operations that were symptomatic of what Barrett considers “right-wing” extremism taking root in Canada.  Perhaps Barrett was concerned that if he didn’t at least make the admission that the EBS was a police front, someone else might find “the document” that he himself had found, and discredit his book.

Despite Barrett’s blackout on the identities of the men involved in his grudging exposé, I have managed to identify the man who was fired from the Central Housing and Mortgage Corporation, whom Barrett says exposed the EBS as a police front.  That man was Walter Rudnicki.

And I have managed to identify the MP who I think submitted Rudnicki’s document to an inquiry about the RCMP.  That man was Frank Oberle, Senior, a Progressive-Conservative MP from Prince George-Peace River.

In this short segment from the Commons Debates of October 31, 1977 (pages 487-488) (you can find them online in Canadiana.org), Oberle Sr. says:

“Hon. members will recall the case I made when my friend, Walter Rudnicki, was indeed tried and convicted without a chance to defend himself.  A brilliant civil service career was destroyed.  His family life was interrupted by this government simply because he was identified as a subversive.  He was fired from the public service.”

That identifies Oberle as linked with Rudnicki.  A very strong indication that I do have the right MP is the additional material in the same Federal Hansard from October 1977, where Oberle provides the House of Commons with a useful snapshot of Canada’s multiple security forces, and identifies the civilian force that Barrett calls the ‘red squads’ which were used along with the EBS in the campus-based police operation at U of T to set up a right-wing front in Canada.  Our PC member from Prince George-Peace River, in the Commons Debates of October 31, 1977, narrates.  (See Hansard, page 487.)

Mr. F. Oberle:
Commons Debates of 31 October 1977, page 487

Commons Debates of 31 October 1977, page 487

Top left column of the page of Hansard above:

“Let us for a moment consider what is meant by the term security forces.  Take a look at some of them.  We must be specific.  Apart from the RCMP law enforcement agency, the federal agency, there is, of course, what we know as the security service which is responsible to the Commissioner of the RCMP but which has a very special task, that of reacting to subversives, terrorists and so on.  This is an intelligence agency within the RCMP.

Then there is another security force which is called the security analysis group and which operates under the auspices of the Solicitor General.  Perhaps I may quote a former solicitor general, the present Minister of Supply and Services (Mr. Goyer), explaining its functions on September 21, 1971.  He said the purpose was to study the nature, origin, and causes of subversive and revolutionary action, its objectives and techniques, as well as measures necessary to protect Canadians from internal threats.

[….]

Furthermore, the task of this particular security force is to compile and analyze information on subversive and revolutionary groups and other activities, to investigate the nature and scope of the internal threat to Canadians, and to plan measures to counteract those threats.  The Solicitor General told us repeatedly that this particular group was not an operational group.  We know better.  As my hon. friend from the Yukon has clearly shown, this group is indeed an operational police force.  It recruits and trains agents to provoke actions within unions and on university campuses, to infiltrate right wing and left wing societies, to encourage them to demonstrate on the streets, and to promote acts which are normally illegal

Now that we have an idea as to the kind of security forces which are operating in this country I ask the question:  why is it necessary sometimes, as the Prime Minister says, for these agencies to break the law?”

We have thus identified as fact, thanks to a sitting MP, that security services of Canada do recruit “agents” “on university campuses” for clandestine operations.  Fromm was on a university campus (Saint Michael’s College, U of T) when he set up the Edmund Burke Society in 1967, and which Barrett grudgingly admits was a national security front.

The two worst Communists openly denounced by EBS were in fact running the EBS through control over Canada’s national security and police apparatus in 1971
when Fromm and Proos attacked Stang to stop the mass-mailing

Solicitors General over RCMP et als, over EBS
Lawrence Pennell under Pearson July 7, 1965 – April 20, 1968
John Napier Turner under Trudeau April 20, 1968 – July 5, 1968
George James McIlraith under Trudeau July 6, 1968 – December 21, 1970
Jean-Pierre Goyer under Trudeau December 22, 1970 – November 26, 1972

 
It’s interesting that a fifth Solicitor-general in office after the Western Guard has taken over from the EBS in an attempted “purge of police spies” according to author Stanley R. Barrett, is none other than current president of the World Federalists, the “Liberal” Warren Allmand, a signatory to the UNPA, a world petition for an elected assembly at the United Nations.

This “elected” world government (forced into place by two banker-financed wars to set up the League of Nations and then the U.N.) would cement the century-long coup on our countries with the appearance of democracy, called “democratism” by Soviet defector Anatoliy Golitsyn.

Warren Allmand under Trudeau November 27, 1972 – September 13, 1976

Francis Fox, Solicitor-general after Goyer and also under Trudeau, appears in the October 31st Hansard of the Commons Debates on the RCMP question.  Fox was in office (now a cabinet post) from September 14, 1976 – January 27, 1978.

According to Wikipedia (page last modified on 9 December 2016, at 00:56):

“The Solicitor General of Canada was a position in the Canadian ministry from 1892 to 2005.  The position was based on the Solicitor General in the British system and was originally designated as an officer to assist the Minister of Justice.”

In February of 1967  when Paul Fromm and his colleagues founded the Edmund Burke Society, Louis Cardin was justice Minister; barely two months later, Pierre Elliott Trudeau was Justice Minister.

However, Trudeau was present with Pearson from the outset.  Having been elected from the “safe” (majority Jewish) Mount Royal riding in Montreal, Red Pierre assumed the facade of a Member of Parliament on November 8th, 1965.  On arriving in Ottawa, Trudeau was appointed parliamentary secretary to Soviet agent, Prime Minister Lester Pearson; Trudeau became Justice Minister on April 4, 1967.  In March of 1967, the Edmund Burke Society held its first public meeting (Barrett, p. 52).

Moreover, when Trudeau worked for Pearson, the design was already in place to catapult Trudeau into the PMO, underlining the organic alignment between Communist Pierre Trudeau and Soviet agent Pearson.  Sources indicate that Pearson was dying of cancer.  That nonetheless changes nothing of the fact that Pearson danced a quick-step to keep Canada under control in the hands of a trusted protégé.

As Alan Stang observes in his April 1971 article, a manoeuvre he calls “The Big Switch” took place.  Czar-like, Trudeau inherited Pearson’s top office by default.

Indeed, Trudeau was both Prime Minister and Justice Minister in December of 1967 when Pearson announced his intention to retire and Pierre stepped into Pearson’s shoes as de facto  Prime Minister of Canada.  The whole of Canada’s national police and security establishment thus reported to Pierre Trudeau, the Communist.  It had previously reported to Lester Bowles Pearson, aka “Mike”, a Soviet agent.

If you don’t believe Trudeau was a ommunist, read his editorials in Le Devoir  in 1952.  See my exclusive English translation of Trudeau’s 7-part series, “I’m Back From Moscow”, on his communist-financed trip to the 1952 Moscow economic summit, a Soviet intelligence front.  Yes, Pierre Elliott Trudeau, while employed in Canada’s Privy Council Office as a junior researcher and adviser to Prime Minister Louis Saint-Laurent (who told the U.N. in 1946 that it was “the basis” of the coming “world government”), led a Communist delegation organized by the Communist Party of Canada to a Moscow Economic Summit organized by V.V. Kuznetsov of Soviet Intelligence.

Allan Stang, in CANADA How The Communists Took Control, paints this picture of Pierre Trudeau, an obviously Communist junior adviser at the time of his employment in the Privy Council Office of Louis Saint-Laurent:

“Indeed, so obvious was the nature of the forthcoming conference that in December, 1951, then-Canadian Justice Minister Stuart Garson warned all Cabinet Ministers that it was a Communist operation, and advised that government employees should not attend.

The conference was held in April, 1952.  Of the 471 delegates, 132 were from officially Communist countries.  Observers at the time estimated that 300 of the remaining 339 were known or suspected Party members – which left 39 or so for window dressing.

Marcus Leslie Hancock, one of the six delegates from Canada [led by Trudeau], says the Canadian delegation was organized by the Canadian Communist Party, which also paid the delegates’ bills.  Hancock, then a Communist, says that everyone else he knew in the delegation was also a Party member.”

In April OF 1968, a Liberal convention picked Pierre Elliott Trudeau as Pearson’s official successor.  Apparently proving that Canada has no real intelligence; it has long been hijacked.

Along with the Prime Minister’s Office, Trudeau inherited control of the national police, which necessarily included personal supervision of an operation known as The Edmund Burke Society.

THE WESTERN GUARD:
An Effort to Purge “Police Spies”

Barrett accounts in part for the emergence of the Western Guard out of the Edmund Burke Society, starting at page 75 (and keep in mind, Barrett has admitted the allegation that the EBS was a police front; but he now sails on, presuming it was merely a grass-roots movement):

“The emergence of the Western Guard was a clear sign that the radicals in the Edmund Burke Society had won out over the more moderate sector, and a direct consequence was the resignation of several members, notably Paul Fromm.  Although Fromm eventually went on to establish a variety of organizations that paralleled the philosophy of the moribund Edmund Burke Society, he remained a member of the militant Western Guard for almost three months after the council decision had been taken to create it.  At a banquet held in Toronto in April 1972, attended by a leading member of the Ku Klux Klan, from Michigan, Fromm gave the opening address (Toronto Sun, 1 May 1972).  In that same month, he spoke to a group of high-school students in Arnprior under the auspices of the Western Guard (Straight Talk, vol. 4, no. 7, April 1972).  The announcement of the name change had appeared in the March issue of Straight Talk, but in the April issue Fromm [page 76] was still listed as the Editor.  It was not until the next issue (May-June 1972) that he ceased being the editor, and a note appeared announcing his resignation.  No other comment was made then, but in the July issue there was a lengthy report on his resignation, revealing that it had been a very bitter affair.  Apparently, there had been an agreement whereby Fromm would promise not to establish another right-wing organization, nor would he announce his resignation from the Western Guard to the press.  However, Fromm did in fact give a press release, and Western Guard officials were of the opinion that he was trying to reconstruct the Edmund Burke Society, and to retain Straight Talk as its organ (Fromm had the mailing list for subscribers.  Moreover, they claimed that Fromm had made off with $400 from the Western Guard treasury.  The parting shot was the accusation that he had arranged to have a female member of the right wing arrested at one of his meetings in June 1972.  This was a friend of Geza Matrai, the man who attacked Kosygin in 1971.”

Barrett now returns (page 77) to the allegations of (Walter Rudnicki) referred to at the end of his previous chapter.

Finally, an intriguing explanation for the emergence of the Western Guard, as well as for Fromm’s resignation, concerns the alleged involvement of some of Canada’s police agencies in establishing the Edmund Burke Society in the first place.  According to the document about this matter referred to in the last chapter, a faction of the Edmund Burke Society eventually rebelled against the police agencies’ close control over its activities.  This faction expelled Fromm and and the principal (undercover) police agent, and founded the Western Guard.  The latter, of course, was to be free from police influence, but the document in question states that some members of the ‘red squad’ remained in the Western Guard.  Moreover, by 1975, an agent provocateur had worked his way into the organization, eventually playing a crucial role in putting Andrews behind bars.  I suppose it could be argued that the determined actions on the part of the police to imprison Andrews merely confirmed that the had earlier been in control of the right-wing organization, and were miffed when the Western Guard shunted them aside.  That, however, strikes me as far-fetched.  Somewhat more plausible evidence of the involvement of the police, but still far from concrete, was Fromm’s own statement that he resigned partly ‘because of the growing lack of security in the Western Guard’.  Indeed, at a Social Credit meeting at the end of February 1972, members of the newly formed Western Guard reportedly informed the Socreds that the change had been made ‘as a move to purge police spies and other undesirables’ who had managed to infiltrate the Edmund Burke Society (Globe and Mail, 28 February 1982).

Barrett manages in that last scenario to make it seem as though Fromm himself was opposed to the police infiltration.  This contradicts Barrett’s earlier observations, drawn from the (Rudnicki) document, that (1) the EBS was set up as a police front, and not merely infiltrated later, although subsequent infiltration did take place; (2) Fromm was the man of the hour when the campus agent for the national police saw to the setting up of the EBS.

Said Baarrett at page 53:

“There is little doubt that the college campuses, especially the University of Toronto, were the center of Edmund Burke Society activity, and that the man of the hour was Paul Fromm.”

Unless Fromm himself, from the University of Toronto campus, was a police agent, and a stoolie for the reds under Pearson who needed to create and polarize “left” and “right” movements in Canada (obviously to use  them); then the EBS could not have been set up; neither of the other two visible founders was from a campus.  Therefore, Fromm’s alleged statement that he resigned from the Western Guard over ‘security’ (police-spy) issues, would be self-serving and tactical.

However, what is truly interesting about the “police spy” allegations in the (Rudnicki) document that Barrett refers to, are the known facts that:  the EBS was set up by the national police (for a federal government under penetrated Communist control) in 1967.  And Pierre Elliott Trudeau, while a cabinet minister in the same Pearson cabal was part of a “secret committee” at Power Corporation of Canada which also in 1967 ordered René Lévesque to set up the Parti Québécois (PQ).  These are two federal operations:  a designer Communist party for Quebec; and a designer “far-right” party for the “Rest of Canada”.

The Parti Québécois is communist; its 1972 manifesto is Communist (free download in the sidebar).  You could hardly set up a Communist party to break up Canada without also creating right-wing subversion in the rest of the country, ready to “negotiate” with it after a “Yes” in a referendum.

CONCLUSION – Part I

To wrap this segment up, referring to the 100,000-piece mailing planned by the John Birch Society (“The John Birch Society Looks at Trudeau:  A Review by Jaanus Proos”, Straight Talk! Volume III, Number 8, May 1971), Janus Proos warns:

“Should the scheme come to fruition, flooding our nation with yet another round of ‘hate literature’ against our swinging P.M., both the ‘CANADA’ article and the J.B.S. will be smeared to no end.  Of concern to active Canadian anti-communists, particularly the Edmund Burke Society, is the overflow of indignation and disbelief that will reach beyond the J.B.S. to the entire anti-communist movement, in fact, to anyone suggesting that communism poses a threat to Canada.”

Yes, do not mass-mail 100,000 warnings to the Canadian electorate that Pearson is a Communist, it will “harm” the anticommunist movement!  It won’t be believed!  The hypocrisy of this line stands in stark contrast to the reality known to Editor Mr. Paul Fromm and apparently soon forgotten by his readers.  Note that Proos says “yet another”.  When had a mailing been done before?

In his 2005 obituary entitled “Ron Gostick, R.I.P.”, penned for On Target, journal of the Australian League of Rights (ALOR) and published on 26 August 2005, Paul Fromm pats Gostick on the back for a far bigger mass-mailing exposing none other than Red Pierre Trudeau in 1968.  Here is Paul Fromm, verbatim:

“In 1968, a new comet flashed across the firmament of Canadian politics.  His name was Pierre Trudeau.  The press promoted him as a fresh breath in Canadian politics, a change from the World War I generation of old war horses like John Diefenbaker and Lester Pearson.  Trudeau, Canadians were told, was trendy, irreverent, prone to wearing a cape or posing holding a rose rakishly in his mouth.  Pat Walsh, a veteran as an undercover agent in communist circles in the Province of Quebec, recognized Trudeau and some of his associates.  He’d briefly flirted with the NDP.  Trudeau was far more to the left than the press was telling Canadians.  Ron Gostick did an extraordinary thing.  While the press gushed about Trudeau image and antics, he actually read what Trudeau had written and researched his activities.  He found in Trudeau an admirer of Castro and Mao, a man who had visited Red China in the early 1960s at the depths of the ‘Great Leap Forward’ famine, and returned gushing with admiration.  Ron Gostick published his findings and, assisted with the list of Liberal convention delegates supplied by the disgruntled Paul Martin Sr’s campaign, he began to circulate his warnings.  Hundreds of thousands of the relevant pamphlets were distributed.  In Toronto, Tory Senator Wallace McCutcheon funded the reprinting of perhaps 60,000 leaflets derived from Mr. Gostick’s work by the fledgling Edmund Burke Society of which I was a member.

I had first met Mr. Gostick the year before at a lecture at a downtown hotel.  I was immediately impressed by his knowledge and methodology:  quoting important sources and offering an illuminating commentary.  Mr. Gostick’s warning about Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s affection for communism, his totalitarian streak and his eagerness to change Canadian society brought him a torrent of abuse.  He was denounced as a “hatemonger.”  As has happened in so many instances since, his opponents didn’t say he was wrong, didn’t argue with his facts.  They simply hollered ‘hate’ and said he shouldn’t have said those things.  Within a few years, it became obvious that Ron Gostick’s warnings were more than valid.  Not until the early ’70s did a few right of centre journalists like Lubor Zink and Peter Worthington dare to say what Ron Gostick had said in 1968.”

My, oh my.  Alan Stang “dared” to say it of Pearson in 1971 and was flamed for it by Proos and Fromm, whose EBS had allegedly participated in that same Gostick mass-mailing.

Proos alleged the mailing would damage the anticommunist movement.

In “Frightening Canadian Federal Elections,” for The New Times, Vol. 34, No. 7, July 1968 (Australian League of Rights — ALOR), Eric D. Butler gives a different history of that mailing of Pat Walsh’a material on Trudeau by Gostick, and its outcome.

First, so effective was the mailing on Trudeau by Gostick that Butler reports, in his highlighted opening paragraph:

“Mr. Ron Gostick, director of the Canadian League of Rights, played a major role in the elections.  If it had not been for the tremendous campaign initiated by Mr. Gostick, the Trudeau victory would have been astronomical.  But as Mr. (Eric) Butler reports, there is every sign of a major conservative grass-roots upsurge.”

Butler then tells the story of the “Frightening” Canadian elections of 1968, the Trudeaumania, the exploitation of teenagers with a spectacle approaching mass mysteria in some quarters, the absence of a platform, and Red Pierre Trudeau’s “deep and well-organized support inside the mass media”.  However, said Walsh:

“… a development of the greatest significance started to take place.  There was an increasing flood of demands right across Canada for The Canadian Intelligence Services issue on Mr. Trudeau.  The flood reached tidal proportions and Canadian Intelligence Publications could not meet the demand.  Some groups were authorized to reprint.  Others did not bother to seek permission to republish.  A grass-roots development was now taking place, which had broken the boycott of silence by the mass media.  Mr. Trudeau’s strategists then decided that something had to be done.”

F. Paul Fromm, B.A. and Janus Proos obviously knew how successful a mass-mailing could be.  While Proos claimed it would harm the anticommunist movement, he forgot to say that the mailing the EBS itself took part in (unless they delivered their own 60,000 copies to a dumpster), created not disbelief but tremendous interest among Canadians who had been betrayed by their left-leaning media.  The truth comes out when Eric Butler writes about the “Frightening Canadian Federal Elections”.

Proos and Fromm smeared American anticommunist Alan Stang to prevent a Canadian mass-mailing.  They smeared him to protect Soviet agent Pearson, and the Communist penetration of the federal government for which they, themselves were working.

They smeared Allan Stang by alleging he had published a forgery in CANADA How The Communists Took Control!  Said Proos:

“A telegram, reproduced on the article’s centerfold, reputed to have been sent by Jean-Louis Gagnon is an outright forgery.  A similar telegram was sent but not this one.”

Stang’s head must have spun, the telegram he published in American Opinion was identical to the telegram Straight Talk!  published in a parallel issue that same month of April 1971.

In the next installment of this exposé on Paul Fromm, stooge for the Reds, I will show you the two identical telegrams.

… To be continued.
_________

Read Eric D. Butler’s “Frightening Canadian Federal Elections,” for The New Times, Vol. 34, No. 7, July 1968 (Australian League of Rights – ALOR)
https://anticommunistarchive.wordpress.com/2019/04/06/frightening-canadian-federal-elections-by-eric-d-butler/

Read some of the material Pat Walsh and Ron Gostick circulated on Red Pierre Trudeau in 1968:  ““Trudeau Spearheading Fabian Takeover””, Canadian Intelligence Service (private publication) VOL. 18 — NO. 3 Flesherton, Ontario, March, 1968

In the sidebar:  Exclusive English translation of the 1972 manifesto of the Parti Québécois for a Communist state of Quebec, under “industrial democracy,” the “true heir to Karl Marx” on the program of the Socialist International.
 

SUBSCRIBE.  I’m a researcher.  What I learn, you learn.

 

News-Slanting and Communist-line Propaganda on the CBC

Category:  Historical reprints
Source:  Brief of Ron Gostick.  Cover:  This brief deals with alleged news slanting and communist line propaganda on the C.B.C.  Brief #145, ex. 285

Download scans of the original Brief from the National Archives, together with a few more related vintage news items:&nbsp: https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZkVfeZBJNB4XlG1f43QH4kUshSBp8TnD37


 

Nota Bene:  My discussion of this Brief follows below. (Admin. NSIM)

 


 

BRIEF

respecting

News-Slanting and Communist-line
Propaganda on the CBC

 

Presented to:    ROYAL COMMISSION ON BROADCASTING,
                          Ottawa, Canada

by:     RON GOSTICK of Flesherton, Ontario,
          Editor of The Canadian Intelligence Service
          and director of The Canadian Anti-Communist League

April 13, 1956

 
The Free World is spending immense financial resources combatting the international Communist conspiracy which already holds in slavery over 900 million souls.  In Canada the struggle is yet a ‘cold’ one — a psychological, ideological battle for the minds and souls of men.  Our defence, therefore, requires not only military preparedness, but full information and a thorough understanding of Communist strategies, tactics and propaganda.

The CBC should be our most powerful cold war weapon in the defence of this nation and Christian civilization.  Yet, it is a disturbing paradox that as we spend billions of dollars in defence against the Communist conspiracy, the Number 1 weapon in our ideological arsenal, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, more and more reflects the leftwing, pro-Communist propaganda line.

Communist Propaganda Line

Perhaps the best approach to this question is to lay down the Red propaganda line, and then compare the CBC’s line with it over a period of years.  The Communist ‘line’ in recent years has included:

1.  Promoting of ‘peaceful co-existence’ and trade with Red regimes.

2.  Disparaging Chiang Kai-shek and demanding ‘recognition’ (diplomatic facilities and privileges) and a UN seat for Red China.

3.  Smearing and ridiculing of anti-Communist leadership throughout the world, while praising the fence-sitters and neutralists in the cold war.

4.  Popularizing of a smear vocabulary — including such terms as:  guilt by association, hysteria, witch-hunt, fascist, book-burning, reactionary, etc. — to be hurled at those who effectively oppose Red activities.

The CBC Propaganda Line

While it would take weeks of this Commission’s time to study even a summary of all the Red-slanted CBC propaganda of recent years, following are a few typical examples.

Oct. 15/50:  Harold Isaacs promoted recognition of Red Chinese regime and its admission to the UN.  Reds pictured as agrarian reformers (a few days later they carried their ‘agrarian reform’ into Tibet and then into Korea).

Nov. 12/50:  Max Freedman expressed opposition to anti-Communist Senator Hickenlooper of Iowa:  lamented defeat of anti-McCarthy Sen. Tydings; spoke glowingly of Mrs. Helen Gahagen Douglas, California darling of the leftwing clique, and disparagingly of Sen. Nixon (his committee exposed Alger Hiss) who defeated her at the polls.

Nov. 21/51:  Mrs. Dorothy Steeves advocated that Red China (then at war with Canada) should be admitted to the UN and given Formosa, at the expense of anti-Communist government of Chiang Kai-shek.

The CBC, in the cultural field, during 1951 sponsored several speakers, including Dr. Brock Chisolm, Bertrand Russell, Dr. Anna Freud, Dr. Ewen Cameron, Professor Fred Hoyle, and Dr. Carl Binger — who attacked religion, Christian ethics and morality.

And during the past five years such propagandists as Max Freedman, Matthew Halton, Alexander Uhl, Frank H. Underhill, James McConaughy, Murray Balantyne, Maxwell Cohen, and many others, have used CBC “Capital Reports” and “Week-end Reviews” to attack and smear Senator Joseph McCarthy’s fight against Reds in the US Government.

June 14/53:  Charles Woodsworth (Capital Report) attacked anti-Communist Syngman Rhee.

July 19/53:  Anne Francis advocated ‘recognition’ of, and a UN seat for, Red China.

Jan. 17/54:  Roger Baldwin, chairman of the American Civil Liberties Union, and associated with no less than 40 Communist ‘fronts’ according to chairman Harold Velde of the Un-American Activities Committee, was a special CBC speaker.  He attacked Sen. McCarthy and all congressional investigations of subversion; boasted that his organization opposed the prosecution of the Red leaders convicted in 1949, opposed loyalty oaths, opposed immigration policies which prohibit Reds from entering the US, and opposed US insistence on loyalty from her UN personnel.

April 15/54:  Ralph Lapp, speaking from Washington over the CBC, defended Dr. Robert Oppenheimer, who had just run afoul of US security requirements through his long recorde of Communist association and support.

May 2/54:  Matthew Halton (C.R.) supported Red Chinese admission to UN.

July 12/54:  James M. Minnifee (C.R.) disparaged Chiang Kai-shek.

This last year, as the emphasis in the Red line shifted more and more to ‘peaceful co-existence’, this whole pack of CBC commentators has parroted the ‘line’.

Even in ‘drama’ we find the ‘line’.  I shall not in this brief deal with the licentiousness and disregard for Christian morality in certain CBC productions.  But it is significant that even in the drama section of the CBC we find the Red propaganda line.  For instance, on the Sunday night (Mar. 17/54) CBC play we heard these lines:

” …You think he is a Communist?  Oh, Joe, this isn’t the United States with its witch-hunting.  This is Canada.”

The foregoing are but a few typical examples of the almost daily Commie ‘line’ carried over the CBC.

The Strange Case of Reuben Ship

CBC policy has perhaps never been more accurately reflected than it was in 1954 in the strange case of Reuben Ship.

On May 30, 1954, the CBC produced and broadcast a Commie-line propaganda play smearing Senator McCarthy and investigations of subversion, written by one Reuben Ship.  A New York Times  report (June 1/54) read:

“Canadians were chuckling today over the ribbing given Senator Joseph R. McCarthy in a burlesque of a Senate committee hearing broadcast last night.  The broadcast originated in Toronto and was carried by the Trans-Canada network of the Canadian Broadcasting Company.

“The play was ‘The Investigator’ by Reuben Ship of Montreal, with John Drainie of Montreal playing the title role with such accent, intonation of voice and mannerisms of speech that many listeners thought for a time that they were listening to a recording of the Wisconsin Republican Senator.

“The play concerns an investigation ‘up there’ after the investigator is killed in a plane crash.”

And just who is Reuben Ship?  The New York Times  itself supplies the answer:

“Mr. Ship was deported from the United States last year as a result of testimony before the House Committee on Un-American Activities that identified him as a member of the Communist party.”

The files of the U.S. House Committee on Un-American Activities contain the following information on Mr. Reuben Ship:

He was a witness before this Committee during public hearings in Los Angeles, September 24, 1951 (Communism in Motion-Picture Industry), Part 5, pages 1771-1775).  At that time Ship, under the privilege of the ‘Fifth Amendment’, refused to answer questions concerning present or past membership in the Communist Party.

Referring to the radio group of the Communist Party in Los Angeles, of wihch he had been treasurer, Owen Vinson gave the following testimony:

Mr. Tavenner:  Ruben (sic.) Ship appeared before this committee last September and refused to answer any material questions that were asked him.  Was he a member of that group?

Mr. VinsonYes; he was.

Mr. Tavenner:  How do you know that?

Mr. Vinson:  He attended meetings and I collected dues from him, also.

Mr. Tavenner:  What was his occupation?

Mr. Vinson:  Radio writer.

— (Communism in Los Angeles Professional Groups, Part 3, October 2, 1952, p. 4078.)

Paul Marion, an actor who was a member of the Communist Party from early 1946 until early 1948, in listing for the Committee those members of the radio group of the Communist Party in Los Angeles to which he had belonged, named Ruben (sic.) Ship.

Mrs. Pauline Swanson Townsend, a member of the Communist Party from 1943 to 1948, testified before the Committee on March 12, 1953, that Reuben Ship’s membership card in the Communist Party was turned in through her branch.

William L. Alland, motion-picture producer and former Communist Party member, testified before the Committee on November 23, 1953, in part:

Mr. Tavenner:  Now, will you tell the committee, please, what the principal activity was of this group of the Communist Party organized within the radio field?

Mr. Alland:  Its principal activity was attempting to control the Radio Writers Guild … They wanted the Radio Writers Guild to try to get the Screen Writers Guild to be more lenient in its actions and attitudes toward the Communist members in the Screen Writers Guild.  They tried to get its members in any way possible to censure and block the work of the Un-American Activities Committee, certainly, and to in any way possible aid and support those people who had been exposed by the committee …

Mr. Tavenner:  Can you recall members of your Communist Party group who actually became officials in the Radio Writers’ Guild as a result of the activities of your group?

Mr. Alland:  … Reuben Ship was an official …

COUNTERATTACK, the authoritative New York report on Communist activities, in its January 21/55 issue, revealed that the tape recording of the CBC production of “The Investigator” was sold to Ship, and from it a long-playing record was produced, handled in New York by Walter Colquitt and John Bubbers (B & B Recording, Inc.).

The Daily Worker  expressed its pleasure over this CBC venture, boasting that the sale of records would not be less than 100,000 — at $5.95 each!

Thus did the CBC not only produce and feed to the Canadian public, at its own expense, a Red-line propaganda piece, but it also helped to raise funds for ‘Fifth Amendment’ Ship and his associates!

Reports indicate that there was a heavy mail sent to CBC Chairman Dunton’s office, protesting this production.  One citizen who protested advised me that Mr. Dunton’s reply was to the effect that it was not proved that Ship was a Communist.  A study of the foregoing testimony would indicate that Mr. Dunton has a cavalier disregard for evidence, at least when it concerns pro-Communist writers.

Overt CBC Communist Support

Following are a few examples of overt CBC support of the Communist conspiracy in Canada:

  • During the federal election in 1953 the LPP (Communist Party) was given free time on the CBC.  At that very time thousands of Canadian boys were in Korea risking their lives, supposedly in defence of the very things which the Reds in Canada, with the co-operation of the CBC, were working to destroy.  Combat Communism in Korea — but subsidize it at home!

  • The CBC televised the 1954 May Day parade and rally in Vancouver, addressed by such Red leaders as A. A. MacLeod (Ontario Red Leader) and Harvey Murphy of the West Coast.  The Communist weekly, The Canadian Tribune  (May 17.54) congratulated the CBC for carrying this propaganda at the taxpayers’ expense.  Again, this is a case of taxing Canadians to arm against Communism, and at the same time taxing them to buy TV facilities for the Reds to spread their poison in Canada.

  • The same Commie weekly, in June of 1954, warmly praised the CBC for its Reuben Ship production; and in September of 1954 reported favourably on Canadian TV development as a government monopoly, beginning to carry educational programs into Canadian schools. 1  A letter published in the February 27, 1956, issue of this Red organ expresses pride in the CBC, referring to it as the “most democratic institution in Canada.”

CBC Communist Line Stepped Up

The fantastic success of this Red infiltration is evident from the glowing accounts of CBC programs recently carried in the Communist press.

Last October 1st, CBC carried the last of its Focus — series — a two-hour Commie play entitled We Shall Not Be Moved, which received two full columns of build-up in the September 25th CBC Times, and rapturous applause from the Red press.

The U.S. West Coast Communist organ, Daily People’s World (Oct. 13), reported:

“The Canadian Broadcasting Corp. made radio history Oct. 1 when it presented a two-hour special program, ‘We Shall Not Be Moved,’ in which Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, now jailed as a Smith Act victim, is portrayed as a leading figure.”

This CBC production featured a recording by Paul Robeson, the notorious Communist-front personality and money-raiser.  The People’s World  boasts that it “took over the best possible broadcasting time — 8 to 10 p.m. Saturday.

There were no interruptions — even the usual station breaks were omitted.”

The play glorified Elizabeth Gurley Flynn as a “rebel girl,” and People’s World, hardly able to conceal its mirth, suggested:

“Perhaps someone has made a recording of this program as was done with the play ‘The Investigator’ from the same network.  It would be a smash hit.”

The Canadian Communist weekly, The Tribune  (Oct. 17), carried this letter to Elizabeth Flynn:

“You were not in your cell Saturday evening, October 1st.  You travelled across the Canadian border.  You were in many Canadian homes. …”

And the same Communist organ (Oct. 10), under a 3-column headline “THREE CHEERS FOR THE CBC,” eulogizes it in these terms:

“For the excellence of this program all concerned must be congratulated.  John Reeves, the producer, deserves special applause.  He struck a new vein for Canadian radio to work, and it is a rich one.”

The truth of the matter, of course, is that Elizabeth Gurley Flynn is one of the leaders of the Communist conspiracy in the U.S., and is presently serving a prison term for her role in Red subversion in America.

The Communist propaganda line today is to paint Communists as persecuted champions of the working class, make the public believe that there really is no Communist menace, and defeat or emasculate anti-Communist security measures in order to spring their convicted agents from prison and open the way for further infiltration.

This CBC production, by glorifying the Red prisoner, and undermining security measures, followed every turn in the Communist line.  Thus, as the U.S. cracks down on subversion, the CBC is used to beam the Red line to the U.S. and at the same time brainwash Canadians.

It is difficult to ujnderstand how such an incredible situation has developed in our CBC.  This material is not merely slanted in favour of Communism — it IS Communism, pure and simple.  The people responsible for staging such productions must be either outright Communists, or ‘egg-heads’ under the influence and control of those directing today’s Red line.

CBC Bias Widely Recognized

That the disturbing leftwing, anti-Christian influence I observe in the CBC is no figment of the imagination, is confirmed when we note but a few of the increasing protests.

Dr. W. A. Brown, Lion’s Club Governor for Renfrew, in 1951 told the Ottawa Lions Club:

“I am opposed to the godless vaporings of some top United Nations members of the medical profession heard over the government-owned radio system on a recent Sunday evening.”

Lions International, he said, was “a Godfearing, Christian organization, and we are not going to stand for some of this CBC broadcasting.”

The Canadian Slovak League, in a brief to the Ministers of External Affairs and National Defence in 1952, relating to CBC-Slovakia policy, said:

“The Slovaks are a conservative people with an absolute Catholic majority (about 85%), but the propaganda from Canada for Slovakia is performed by this Staff of Employees:  Dr. Schmolka, Mr. Rejhon and his brother, Reichman, Stauber, and Williams, all of whom are of the Jewish religion … and of a deep socialistic conviction … and also three Czechs, Volesky, Skvor and Mrs. Vasak.  We strongly doubt … that this is a good staff for the defence of these (Christian and national) ideals which today alone strengthen nations in their resistance.”

The leading Western Canada weekly, Camrose Canadian (July 22/53), commenting on a CBC report by Anne Francis in favour of recognition of Red China, described the talk as “pretty hot socialist propaganda.”  And on Sept. 9/53, commenting on a series of CBC talks, observed:  “An outsider could readily label each speaker as a Communist fellow traveller … and we Canadians are paying these men …”

The Ensign  (July 31/54) said editorially:

“The ‘radio curtain’ can be noted also in Canada in the consistency of choice of political commentators on the nationally owned networks, who are most critical of Washington and most sympathetic to the recognition of Red China.

“It is interesting how a conspiracy of silence towards those advocating contrary views is a growing problem in many countries. …”

And on October 10/54 The Ensign  observed:

“What the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation through a consistent choice of political commentators seems to be advocating is what Moscow desires.”

The Edmonton Journal, two years ago, observed editorially:

“Canadian listeners would like to have a balanced, objective account … Instead, all the commentators on this program, whether Canadians or Americans, give us virtually nothing except straight Democratic Party doctrine.”

Why The Strange Conformity ?

Why do the overwhelming majority of CBC commentators consistently follow the line promoted by the Communists, and consistently attack the most militant anti-Communist leaders and measures?

Is it because only individuals holding such pink views are selected consistently by the CBC ?

Or is it because reporters are anxious for these CBC contracts, and promote the line which they know, from experience, will assure them of more contracts?

It is respectfully submitted, gentlemen, that the CBC should be our most powerful weapon in the present ideological struggle, but that the evidence presented demonstrates that all too often it is actually used to further the Communist propaganda line.

It is hoped that the information contained in this brief, and the questions raised, will assist the Commission in finding and recommending action for the eliminating of Communist propaganda from our CBC.

– 30 –

 
______
 
1  Constitutionally, the federal government (and thus the CBC) is denied (local) Education powers.  This was pointed out by Quebec historian, Robert Rumilly, also in 1956, the year of this Brief, in his L’Infiltration gauchiste au Canada français (The Leftist Infiltration in French Canada).  Radio-Canada is the French name of the CBC in Quebec.  From page 95:

Radio-Canada complète et soutient le réseau gauchiste qui s’est mis en place, dans notre province, depuis quelques années.

Il est déjà inconstitutionnel que l’État fédéral accapare une tranche de l’éducation –- domaine réservé aux provinces –- comme il le fait par le truchement de Radio-Canada.  Les tribunaux ont reconnu à l’État fédéral le droit de réglementer l’usage des ondes.  Ils ne lui ont reconnu aucun droit sur l’éducation populaire.  La Société Radio-Canada, telle qu’elle fonctionne, est illégale.  Il est doublement intolérable que la radio et la télévision d’État d’expression française, vivant des deniers du peuple canadien-français, cherche à l’entraîner vers une idéologie contraire à ses traditions et à ses aspirations nationales.

Radio-Canada completes and has been supporting the leftist network set up in our province in the last few years.

It is unconstitutional already that the Federal state monopolizes a section of education –- a domain reserved to the provinces –- which it does by the interposition of Radio-Canada.  The courts have recognized to the Federal state the right to regulate the use of the air­waves.  They have not conceded to it any right of public education.  Radio-Canada, the corporation, such as it functions, is illegal.  It is doubly intolerable that French-language State radio and television, living off public funds of the French-Canadian people, seek to drag them towards an ideology contrary to their own traditions and their national aspirations.

However, the CBC today has done far more than to “merely” invade the “exclusive” provincial Education power.  Major mega-movie-length series productions, edified by the CBC web site, have revised Canada’s history while offering course plans and “educational” packages to teachers Canada-wide.  Thus, the CBC conscripts teachers to indoctrinate, meaning brainwash, Canadian children at the expense of their parents, the taxpayers, both federal and provincial.

But with what are they indoctrinating our children?  Well, if you were the Soviet Union, having feigned collapse with intent to penetrate and merge with socialized and restructured western countries (as warned by KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn), imagine your advantage if the children of these countries could be made to grow up not merely believing their nation was on the brink of collapse, but literally expecting and accepting that it was going to happen.  And that this feigned collapse of their own countries was the signal for the long-planned Communist restructuring to carry off the merger.

In Canada, our children are being brainwashed to view the Communist dismantling and restructuring of Canada as inevitable.  This is not “education”.

This is what the CBC has accomplished for the benefit of world Communism and the advance of the underground Soviet Union, with its “history” segment on the “struggle” of the (Communist) Parti Québécois with (Communist) prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau, entitled:  “A Fragile Unity”, produced by Canada’s man on the KGB payroll, Mark Starowicz.
 

Mark Starowicz’s Red demoralization of Canada: A Fragile Unity

Mark Starowicz’s Red demoralization of Canada: A Fragile Unity

The images above, top-down, are taken from [1] the 1968 organization by René Lévesque of the (Communist) Parti Québécois, implying, of course, the 1980 referendum conducted by him unlawfully as contrary to Confederation; [2] Pierre Elliott Trudeau of the “secret committee” of Power Corporation which appointed Lévesque to set up the PQ; and [3] the 1982 false “patriation” which overthrew the lawful Parliament and Legislatures of Canada using the Sovereign as the front to pull it off.  The title of the episode, “A Fragile Unity”, however, impliedly refers to the 1995 referendum, also unlawful, also under the PQ, and which most likely was rigged, but failed nonetheless thanks to a last-minute Canada Rally organized by a local businessman.

The “patriation” image implies what those behind the scenes know; had the 1980 referendum pulled off a “Yes”, United Kingdom, under the pretense of constitutional “amendment” of the British North America Acts (1867 et seq), was to pass a “law” “patriating” a new constitution disassembling Canada into a string of “associated” proto-Communist banana republics.

CBC producer Mark Starowicz promised a KGB agent he would act on behalf of Soviet interests

CBC producer Mark Starowicz promised a KGB agent he would act on behalf of Soviet interests


In 1975, Progressive-Conservative Member of the Canadian Parliament, Tom Cossitt (for Leeds) tried repeatedly to open an inquiry into the KGB’s Konstantin Geyvandov, a Pravda  correspondent, and money received from him and promises made to him by CBC producer, Mark Starowicz:
 
According to just one of his interventions in federal Hansard, on the 12th of June 1975, the Hon. Thomas Charles Cossitt said in the House:

Mr. Speaker. I rise under the provisions of Standing Order 43 to ask leave to move, seconded by the hon. member for Dauphin (Mr. Ritchie), the following motion:

The truly Honorable Mr. Tom Cossitt, a Canadian hero.

The truly Honorable Mr. Tom Cossitt,
a Canadian hero.

That a special committee of this House be set up forthwith to investigate all activities of Soviet journalist Konstantin Geivandov while he was in Canada, that the committee be charged with examining all connections with this matter on the part of Mark Starowicz, executive producer of the CBC program “As It Happens”, that the committee be given power to summon any persons whatsoever as witnesses that it deems advisable, that files on the matter including those of the Departments of Manpower and Immigration, External Affairs and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police showing the activities of Geivandov, Starowicz, and others, be produced to the committee and, finally, that such files, pending examination by the committee, be forthwith placed in the safe custody of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada to guarantee their safety from destruction for political or any other purposes whatsoever.

In 1979, the irrepressible Mr. Cossitt is continuing his effort to launch a formal investigation:

Mr. Tom Cossitt (Leeds):

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a matter of urgent necessity as a result of a statement made by the Prime Minister (Mr. Clark) this morning at his press conference, that there was concern within the CBC regarding an individual who allegedly assisted a KGB representative in Canada, and I might add that this individual had been previously identified in the Ontario legislature by the attorney general of Ontario as CBC producer Mark Starowicz.  I move, seconded by the hon. member for York North (Mr. Gamble):

Whereas CBC producer Mark Starowicz assisted KGB agent Konstantine Geyvandov in compiling information on certain persons, allegedly on six different occasions, and also promisedto act on behalf of Soviet interests“, that the CBC be required to give a public explanation as to why Mark Starowicz continues as producer of the public opinion influencing program “Sunday Morning” and, finally, as to why he is being considered at this very moment to head all CBC national news and public affairs programming.

In 1983, on Friday, March the 4th, another Progressive-Conservative Member, the Hon. Elmer MacIntosh MacKay (for Central Nova) picks up where Mr. Cossitt left off (I have not cited all of Mr. Cossitt’s interventions).  Mr. McKay will quote newspaperman Peter Worthington quoting the RCMP.

Madam Speaker, some years ago the then Member for Leeds [Mr. Cossitt] noted for the first time in this House the name of CBC producer Mark Starowicz in connection with the expelled KGB agent, Konstantin Geyvandov, who masqueraded in Ottawa as a Soviet journalist.  Two years later the Attorney General of Ontario quoted in the Legislature an RCMP document according to which a Canadian media person over a period of five years was selling Geyvandov reports at clandestine meetings.  Next day CBC producer Mark Starowicz identified himself as the person who, between 1970 and 1973, had accepted money for reports written for a Soviet correspondent in Ottawa.

Three months later Peter Worthington published excerpts from an RCMP document dated March 24, 1976, as well as this passage:

The RCMP report says Pravda’s man in Ottawa, Geyvandov, was expelled from Canada after persuading a Canadian journalist to act on behalf of Soviet interests when reporting Canadian political events. …

I am strongly inclined to believe that the Canadian media person in the McMurtry statement and the Canadian journalist in the report referred to by Mr. Worthington are the same person.  I wrote about it to the Solicitor General (Mr. Kaplan).  He is reluctant to reveal the man’s identity.  In the meantime, CBC keeps on its payroll a senior executive who, by his own admission, was also on the payroll of a Soviet official and who, I strongly suspect, is the same person identified by the RCMP as acting on behalf of Soviet interests.

I do not believe at this stage that the Liberal Government with its track record –

Two sad ironies:  there has been a Southern-Rhodesian-style coup on Parliament under Trudeau in 1982.  Canada, long occupied, has been dealt a pounding blow.  Men (quoted below) who would be legitimate Members of the House are apparently not aware, although the coup was admitted by one of its perpetrators in 1982, Barry Lee Strayer, in his pair of Cronkite Lectures to a university law faculty.

The other sad irony:  Mr. McKay is not among friends in the House.  The “Madam Speaker” to whom he has addressed his plea is Jeanne Benoit Sauvé, future Governor General of Canada (representing the post-coup Queen) and the wife of ex-Forestry Minister Maurice Sauvé under Soviet agent prime minister Lester Pearson.

Sauvé sat on the Friday-night “secret committee” at Power Corporation where the plans to set up the (Communist) PQ and put (Communist) Trudeau in power to negotiate with it, were incubated.

In fact, both Jeanne and Maurice Sauvé were involved in a Communist front put in place in the 1950s by Soviet-infested British Secret Intelligence (MI6) and the Communist-staffed CIA, at the prompting of British Fabian socialist Sir Stafford Cripps.  The World Association of Youth (WAY), with Member of Parliament Maurice Sauvé as its first president, and his wife at his side, organized youth to help federalize Europe (destroy the nation-state).  In Canada, after 9/11, a similar group emerged under the wing of Sauvé’s Communist PQ:  the North American Forum on Integration (NAFI), devoted, like WAY, to subverting our youth to restructure the continent for a federalized North American Union on the EU model.

We can see that for nearly a decade, decent men tried to expose Soviet tool, Mr. Mark Starowicz.  However, I am of the view that the above-said Mr. McMurtry is not to be classed among them; the grounds will appear.

In Ontario Hansard of December 9th, 1977, provincial justice minister, the Hon. Mr. Roy McMurtry, while withholding the name of Mr. Starowicz, had nonetheless to admit:

“… the RCMP concern with individuals in the Waffle was increased when it was found that a Canadian news media person, closely associated with leading people in the Waffle, was meeting clandestinely with Konstantin Geyvandov, a Russian KGB intelligence officer who, between August 1968 and September 1973, operated in Canada as a Pravda correspondent.”

McMurtry continued:

“The RCMP investigation confirmed that this Canadian provided reports to Geyvandov during these clandestine meetings and on at least six occasions was paid money by Geyvandov.  Amongst other things, the Canadian was specifically asked by Geyvandov to provide reports to him on the NDP and the Waffle.

“… The RCMP believed that Geyvandov’s purpose in seeking such reports was to assist the Russian KGB intelligence service in deciding whether the Waffle group or any of its members were worthy of further attention by the KGB.”

The Hon. Mr. Gaunt interjects:

“Now a pipeline right to the Kremlin.”

Ontario justice minister Roy McMurtry in the Ontario Legislature on the 9th of December 1977, failed to name Mark Starowicz, though he had to know his name.  McMurtry seems to me to protect Starowicz when he refers to him simply as “a Canadian news media person”.  McMurtry names the Soviet agent, but not Mark Starowicz, who has been on the KGB’s payroll.

The Kitchen Accord

The Kitchen Accord:  L-R:  Roy McMurtry, Marxist Jean Chrétien,
Saskatchewan’s Roy Romanow — the authors of the Kitchen Accord (1979)

Then, in 1981, McMurtry shows up in the media during the (false) “patriation” as one of three men in the photo at the time of the so-called “Kitchen Accord”.  The “Kitchen Accord”, incorrectly described as an agreement to patriate the Constitution (in the propaganda which serves as “news” in Canada), was in fact a “federal-provincial” agreement to overthrow the Parliament and Legislatures for a new form of non-sovereign government.  It was nothing less than a Southern Rhodesian-style coup d’état, a leftist coup on Canada.  However, it was not challenged, at the UN or elsewhere, and I believe that is because Mrs. Windsor leant herself as the front, visiting Canada personally to “proclaim” it as a constitutional amendment, which it was not.

And here is Roy McMurtry in the middle of it, in the guise of a “justice minister”, lending his title, his name and his face to it.

This suggests to me that McMurtry is a left sympathizer; that he deliberately protected Starowicz by withholding his name from the Ontario Members.  (In fact, I haven’t got any earlier Ontario Hansard than the one I’ve quoted, and which is posted online.  It is always possible that McMurtry mentioned Starowicz on another occasion, but to date I have nothing to suggest that he did.)

Now, McMurtry’s payoff for the “Kitchen Accord”:  a distinguished career under the 1982 coup d’état constitution, culminating in his appointment as Chief Justice of Ontario, the courts now, of course, imposing the illegal Charter.  At his law firm’s web site (Hull & Hull LLP, 2016), the now-retired McMurtry

“was deeply involved in the patriation of the Canadian Constitution and the creation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  During that period, he also served four years as the Solicitor General for Ontario.”

The law firm also says:

“In February 1996, he [McMurtry] was appointed Chief Justice of Ontario, a capacity in which he served for over 11 years until May 30, 2007.”

That places Mr. McMurtry in the Ontario provincial driver’s seat during the artificial “law suit”, Lalonde v. Ontario 1, concocted out of the wholly staged, “SOS Montfort” protest, for the sole purpose of rubber-stamping with a non-appealed concocted “judgment” of an Ontario court of record, the so-called “unwritten principles” of the 1998 “secession” opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada’s non-judicial advisory board, to make them look like “law”.  The “principles” then form the basis of the federal Clarity Act, a counterfeit “statute” intended to force Canada to dismantle itself, while authorizing the international community to “recognize” a string of UDIs.  And thus will end Canada’s so-called “fragile unity” (according to former executive producer at the CBC, Mark Starowicz).

In recent results on Google, both Mr. McMurtry and Mr. Starowicz collected their official recognitions fromConfederation Center of the Arts (See:  Previous Symons Medal Recipients:) “Canada”:  http://www.confederationcentre.com/en/news-read-more.php?news=753
 

In Conclusion

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) is the ultimate, entirely subversive tool of political control exerted over the educational and communications systems of a target country by a hostile foreign power.  Sun Tzu would be awe-struck.
 

______
 
1  Lalonde c. Ontario (Commission de restructuration des services de santé), 56 OR (3d) 577 [Not online];  Lalonde v. Ontario (Commission de restructuration des services de santé), 2001 CanLII 21164 (ON CA);