Part I
My exclusive English translation of Quand nous serons vraiment chez nous, the 1972 manifesto of the Parti Québécois for a Communist state of Quebec, is almost complete. Only about 10% remains to be done; it has been drafted, and needs to be polished. Please visit the sidebar to read the English version of this hidden Communist plan to use Quebec to dismantle Canada by taking the powers out of Parliament for use by the new Communist country of Quebec.
A young Guy Bertrand, candidate for the Communist Parti Québécois
Obviously, people who have been pretending to be “separatists” are not separatists at all, they are Communists. If we look up the background of René Lévesque, for example, it’s obvious that he is a Communist. He was known to be a Communist at the time he first ran for election, and for that reason, he had a hard time getting in.
However, other people have been portrayed as “separatists” or as “federalists” over the years, who really are Communists. Language has been abused in order to shield them, and to obscure the fact that they are not “opposed” to each other, but are working together from seemingly opposite vantage points. It’s a bit like the dunking you might get at a birthday party. Someone grabs your feet, someone grabs your shoulders, and while you are helpless, they rush to the water’s edge and toss you in.
Founding of the Communist Parti Québécois with René Lévesque and Guy Bertrand. Bertrand is in the middle, right behind the sign. Lévesque is to his left, which is right in the photo.
Quebec City lawyer, Guy Bertrand, who has been infamous with his “separatist/federalist” flip-flops, pretending in 1995 that he had “changed sides” to defend Canada against the 1995 referendum in Quebec, is neither “federalist” nor “separatist” but Communist. This is clear because he is a co-founding member of the Communist Parti Québécois with René Lévesque (see the photo above with Bertrand right behind the sign at the moment of founding the Communist Parti Québécois). He ran for the leadership of the Communist Parti Québécois in 1985. You can match the face to his portrait on the red, white and blue election poster, scanned above.
I also know for a fact that Bertrand’s 1995 “law suit” is a farce and a fraud. It was part of a tactic, together with the Communist-controlled Parti Québécois, and their aiders, abettors and allies at the federal level, in order to manipulate the appearance of “law” to entitle Quebec to international state recognition after an expected “Yes”.
Quebec City lawyer, and veiled Communist, Guy Bertrand
You’ll find the name Robert Lesage, Q.C. (Quebec), cited by La Forest in the article penned by Rhodes Scholar La Forest describing the work of that committee for the September 1979 issue of the Canadian Bar Review. (See the footnote at page 494.) The Committee’s project was called “Towards A New Canada“. La Forest’s article in Volume 57 of the Canadian Bar Review, (journal of the non-governmental Canadian Bar Association), was entitled “Towards A New Canada: The Canadian Bar Association’s Report on the Constitution“. You can also read it online at the web site of the Canadian Bar Association if you have a university library account.
The fact that the patriation was indeed a coup d’état is admitted in his own words by a chief architect and adviser to the coup executive, Barry Lee Strayer, in a pair of lectures he delivered to a College of Law within months after the 1982 coup d’état. You can read those lectures online, with my introductory comments: Patriation and Legitimacy of the Canadian Constitution. And it was a coup d’état of the Left, all linked to the Communist world-government crowd at the Socialist International (SI), including the New Democratic Party of Canada (NDP) which has held executive positions in the Red, Red, Socialist International. If you search this present web site, you will also find information on the Socialist International, and the ties to it of the Parti Québécois. I have in particular translated an article on the subject by Philippe Poulin, “Attempt of the Parti Québécois to Join the Socialist International,” on which I will one day post a few comments. And you will find at this present web site René Lévesque’s 1982 letter to the Socialist International, seeking entrance of the Parti Québécois.
With respect to Bertrand’s phony “law suit” in 1995, without going into all the fine details: in Quebec, under the Code of Civil Procedure, whoever wants to institute a law suit must comply with strict fundamentals. The first fundamental is called “interest“. You must have a real, existing, personal “sufficient interest” in the point which you are raising before a court in Quebec. At Title III, “Rules Applicable to All Actions”, Chapter I, “Actions, Parties to Actions and Attorneys,” (in French: Titre III, Règles Applicables À Toutes Les Demandes En Justice, Chapitre I, De L’action, Des Parties, Des Procureurs), you will read:
55. Celui qui forme une demande en justice, soit pour obtenir la sanction d’un droit méconnu, menacé ou dénié, soit pour faire autrement prononcer sur l’existence d’une situation juridique, doit y avoir un intérêt suffisant.
55. Whoever brings an action at law, whether for the enforcement of a right which is not recognized or is jeopardized or denied, or otherwise to obtain a pronouncement upon the existence of a legal situation, must have a sufficient interest therein.
1965 (1re sess.), c. 80, a. 55.
1965 (1st sess.), c. 80, a. 55.
If you don’t meet that legal requirement of “sufficient interest“, you therefore do not have a “law suit”. Your documents, which you have filed into court, regardless that you paid for a court stamp, regardless that they have all been rubber-stamped at various desks, regardless that a bailiff may have claimed to “serve” it (there is no “legal service”, either, where there is no legal “interest”), regardless that a name or citation is given to the file in official courthouse records, it remains nothing but a file folder full of documents. It has never become a “law suit” in the legal sense, and therefore can never attract the jurisdiction of the court to deal with it, because you have no personal, immediate and existing “interest”. There is plenty of case law in the library to explain what “sufficient interest” means in Quebec law. Ask a reference librarian for the annotated volumes on Code of Civil Procedure/Code de procédure civile.
Guy Bertrand and André Joli-Coeur in the 1996-1998 Quebec Secession Scam at the unconstitutional non-judicial, section 53 advisory board of the post-1982 coup Supreme Court of Canada
After that, the file, which attained a surreal existence entirely from media coverage, becomes very tactical on many levels, and I won’t get into it, because I will be pleading at court to throw it out, as part of the network of subversion behind the phony 1998 “Secession” Reference. Bertrand’s scamming in this file, with his fellow Communists running the Parti Québécois at the time of the 1995 referendum, plowed a direct path to the phony 1998 “Supreme Court of Canada” Quebec “Secession” Reference and its “unwritten principles” compelling Canada to negotiate its own dismantling with the Quebec Communists. (I will also be throwing out the phony Clarity Act, which is based on the phony “unwritten principles” when I get to court. And, yes, you can still do it even though the courts have been hijacked under the 1982 coup d’état.)
Mr. Justice Gérard Vincent La Forest — another of the 1982 coup plotters who got himself a high judicial job under the “new” constitution he himself helped to impose on Canada.
In addition, the La Forest-CBA project of “A New Canada” was intended to “constitutionalize” (impose) multiculturalism as Canada’s “New Constitution”. Multiculturalism is Soviet-Zionist, not British North American, and manifestly not “Canadian”. It is the hijacking of Canada by the “New World Order” for ends opposed to Confederation. It destroys the self-government of the Founding Peoples of Canada, established for them permanently in 1867. If you are interested in the true constitution and the rights of the Canadian Founding Peoples, you may wish to visit the web site of the Alliance of the Founding Peoples of Canada / Alliance des peuples fondateurs du Canada, and subscribe.
Said Mr. La Forest in the September 1979 Canadian Bar Review at p. 500 of his article, “Towards A New Canada“:
For other language and ethnic groups far less can be done as a practical matter, but the Committee felt that in addition to the preambular statement on multiculturalism, the constitution should explicitly recognize the right of the federal and provincial legislatures to assist these groups in promoting their languages and cultures.
Why would a lawyer who is attempting to influence the draft of a new imposed constitution say that?
Precisely because he knows very well that Canada belongs to the Founding Peoples of the country for whom the Provinces were created in which they were the local majorities at the time, and should still be today. Canada is legally an ethnic federation. Whether the United States of America is also legally an ethnic federation, I couldn’t tell you; but Canada is, and that is the basis of our rights, because the purpose of Confederation was to preserve us and our cultures for all time. That fact is all over the Hansard (Debates on Confederation of 1865) and the other relevant history of the British North America Act.
Now, the local or Provincial Legislatures are legal jurisdictions belonging principally to the ethnic majorities who obtained them at the time of Confederation. The purpose of these legal jurisdictions is the preservation, promotion and self-government of each of the Founding Peoples, without undue external interference, i.e., from other cultures and ethnicities. That was the whole point in 1867.
Lawful immigration can therefore only be assimilative of the immigrants; it cannot be used the other way around, to assimilate the Founding Peoples into a new multicultural system.
The constitutionally lawful use of these legislative and governmental jurisdictions can therefore only pursue the preservation and self-government of the Founding Peoples. Rhodes Scholar Gérard Vincent La Forest and his CBA “coup committee” therefore knew that “copying and pasting” the constitutional structure of Confederation into the upcoming “New” constitution would not alter these legal jurisdictions and their purposes. It would alter their constitutional sovereignty and change their character, and subject the Founding Peoples to the “government of judges” under the “new” Charter, but it would not authorize any legislature or government in Canada to govern for the sake of the preservation and promotion of other peoples; in particular 200+ foreign races and their cultures whom these Reds planned then to mass-immigrate; and whom they have indeed mass-immigrated.
Those words required by La Forest were never added to the “New” constitution of 1982. Why they failed to stuff them in at the time of the phony “patriation,” I don’t yet know. But they did fail. There is therefore neither “preambular statement” nor “explicit recognition” of “the right” (“right” means constitutional power) of the federal and provincial legislatures to “assist” mass-immigrated groups of hundreds of other races in promoting their languages and cultures.
Foreigners have no “Confederation” here. If they can be assimilated, they must be assimilated, or there is no place for them. Quebec and a few outlying areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia is all that remains of New France. Quebec — all of it, not just a corner in the Gaspé — belongs principally to the French-Canadians; secondarily to the other Founding Peoples who were a minority in Lower Canada (Quebec) in 1867.
Confederation belongs to the Founding Peoples for our benefit. This is the only country we have; these mass immigrants already have countries elsewhere. Moreover, they outnumber us, in some cases more than a million to one, in those countries. They are not endangered species; we are. The Founding Peoples of Canada have no obligation to destroy ourselves, our country, our culture, our Constitution, our Parliament, our Legislatures, and our respective unique institutions of 1867, to serve other people and other purposes.
As a consequence of the complete lack of express language in the “new” 1982 coup constitution to such effect, meaning the complete absence of either a “preambular statement” or any words to authorize all the various provincial and federal “departments” or “ministries” to cater to the mass-immigrated newcomers, and to “multiculturalism” and to “interculturalism,” their doing so is “unlawful” under the coup constitution. And it could never be lawfully done under the British North America Act, 1867. The BNA Act was and still remains Canada’s only lawful Constitution, for whose true Parliament and Legislatures the proper writs have not been issued in many a year.
Brian Mulroney, signer with veiled Communist and Rockefeller mouthpiece, Red Ronald Reagan) of NAFTA (the latter being a stage toward North American Soviet regional union), once appeared on TV and ripped up the “constitution of Canada”. Well, he can rip up his 1988 so-called “Canadian Multiculturalism Act”2, which is a fraud and VOID because there is nothing in the constitution — either in the coup constitution or in The Real Constitution, on which to pin it. Notably, there is no express power to pass it, as it undermines and destroys the rights of the Founding Peoples of Confederation.
The true Constitution needs to be restored in order to restore lawful self-government of the Founding Peoples of Canada to whom the Provinces and the Parliament legally belong.
Bertrand’s Regionalized Red Republic of Quebec
I got off on a tangent — albeit an interesting one — with respect to coup conspirator, Robert Lesage. Now, back to Guy Bertrand and his plan to convert Quebec to a Communist-style regionalized federal republic.
Guy Bertrand’s “Liberté-Nation” Project for a Regionalized Federal Quebec
At first glance, therefore, it reeks of the same old “Sovereignty Association” (1980 referendum) and “Sovereignty Partnership” (1995 referendum), whose object was to flypaper Canada into a Communist regional union by “association”.
Now, the word is not “partnership” or “association” but “conserving our share of Canada“. The Reds are still trying to attach a Communist Quebec to the unconscious and snoring “rest of Canada”.
I’ve translated the book cover (next, below) so you can get the gist of what Communist Guy Bertrand of the Parti Québécois and the 1995 referendum, is up to, now.
Guy Bertrand’s Liberty-Nation Project, Business Plan to Achieve the Independence of Quebec while Conserving our Share of Canada
Maître GUY BERTRAND
PRESENTS
The Liberty-Nation Project
“To make Quebec independent is
to make a part of Canada
independent”
Then, in the sidebar of the book is a MAP of a subdivided Quebec, entitled:
APPEAL TO THE REGIONS
Invitation to the regions
to a changing of the guard
from the provincial
The footer over the map says: Heading towards regional federated states in a Republic. The book’s contents are in point form under the map:
|
|
The title on the top of the picture of the Quebec Provincial Legislature is the subtitle of the book: “Business plan to achieve the independence of Quebec while conserving our share of Canada”. The caption below the Legislature reveals the well-worn tactic of labeling the Reds as being merely “independentists”, i.e. “separatists”. It reads:
The independence of Quebec requires a strong consensus among the population. History clearly demonstrates that the independentists will never be a sufficient majority of the population to make a country of Quebec.
In other words, even when they stuff the ballot boxes, they can’t win.
By that, I mean: the 1995 referendum may well have been rigged. Up to a quarter million phony identities of “new citizen” immigrants are alleged to have been flooded onto the Quebec electoral roles in the handful of years leading to the 1995 referendum.
Certain Quebec election workers in the office of the Director General of Quebec Elections insist that “a file exists” at the DGQE which documents the fact that a couple of hundred thousand “voters” who had registered for the 1995 referendum… had evaporated into thin air when the roles were updated two years later for the next provincial election!
These workers in the DGQE, and other sincere French-Canadians, presumed that the federal government of Canada, which had supplied the identities of these “new citizens” to the DGQE, had used them to register a couple of hundred thousand “NO” votes to “save” Canada.
A “secret committee” of Communist cabinet ministers from Quebec in the federal government of Soviet Agent Lester Bowles Pearson, met Friday nights in 1967 at Power Corporation in Montreal. It was they who conceived the Parti Québécois and appointed Lévesque to organize and lead it.
The CEO’s of Power Corporation sit on the Board and Senate of the Canadian Institute of International Affairs (CIIA), now called “Open Canada” in honor of billionaire George Soros who finances revolutions, Communism, and his Open Society Institute (meaning no more national borders). The CIIA used to brief the Reds recruited into Canada’s federal civil service and External Affairs Department by Soviet Agent Oscar D. Skelton. Among Skelton’s early recruits was Lester Bowles Pearson, who at one point became the president of the CIIA.
The CIIA, as a branch of the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London (headquarters of the international bankers behind the U.N. and world government), and as the Secretariat of the Institute of Pacific Relations (led by Communists taking instructions from the Kremlin and created by the Council on Foreign Relations in the USA) — used to brief Soviet Agent Oscar D. Skelton’s Red recruits into Canada’s External Affairs and Civil Service. Among Skelton’s early recruits was Lester Bowles Pearson, who at one point became the president of the CIIA.
It is the Reds up top, Pearson, Trudeau, Marchand, Maurice Sauvé and many unnamed others, who are behind the Communist Parti Québécois. They have been using it as a pretext to Communize Canada by “negotiation” to “save” “Canadian unity” after a “YES” in a referendum.
Therefore, if the ballots were stuffed (electronically, for example) in the 1995 referendum, they were stuffed by the Red Fed … with “YES” votes. Not with “NO” votes.
It is alleged that the election workers who discovered the “vaporized” quarter-million 1995 “voters” were eventually required to sign promises of secrecy, and were re-assigned to other departments.
Now, back to Bertrand’s book. The cover continues with the following text in two columns:
The strategy aiming to convert the federalists to independentists to obtain a majority vote in favor of independence has to this day not given the expected results and must be abandoned. The referendum approach preferred in 1980 and in 1995 has divided the Québécois into two opposed clans rather than uniting them in a common project. The effort for Quebec independence unfortunately can be summed up by a debate in the course of which the independentists try to impose their needs and their solutions upon the federalists. However, the independence of Quebec must at one and the same time meet the needs of the independentists and the federalists, which is to say, those of all the Québécois.
This reconciliation of needs is not based on a series of compromises, but on the recognition of Québec for what it really is for each of us.
When I assert that “to make Quebec independent is to make a part of Canada independent“, I recognize that the independence of Quebec is not limited to the independence of a Canadian province and its separation from Canada, but to the independence of our part of Canada with all that this implies for our own identity.
In short, the independence of Quebec does not consist in oblit-erating all Canadian character from Quebec, as one bleaches a garment in javel water.
The footer of the book cover, in white text on a blue ground, says:
“The final effort to save the French language in America.”
René Lévesque’s Communist Compromise: restructure all of Canada for French-Canadian “economic, ethnic, linguistic, aspirations
“The current Canada is much too centralized, does not take account of the economic, ethnic, linguistic aspirations of French Canada.”
To which Lévesque replies:
“One can say that, yes. To simplify and to keep it short,
it’s pretty much like that; I believe.”
A second journalist interjects:
“There is a middle-of-the-road solution for Quebec, what shall it be?”
That’s the punch line Lévesque has been waiting for. He says:
“A – a renewal – a restructuring, if you like, of the federation, of the Canadian Confederation.”
That “middle-of-the-road solution” is really Communism. For obvious reasons, they never use that word, or the word “dismantling”. It’s always “renewal”, as if they are just “improving” it. But what they are doing is destroying Canada.
They want to remove not only the national border, but the provincial internal borders. They are changing the population by mass immigration, which affects the internal borders by blotting out the original Canadian Founding ethnicities federalized by these borders, and which these borders signify. In effect, they are eradicating the lawful Constitution by attrition — unless the Founding Peoples wake up and fight back.
By 2014, when Bertrand is publishing the “New Edition” of his “Liberty-Nation Project“, Quebec has been the dumping off point for over 200 foreign races speaking over 135 foreign languages at home and on the streets. One small immigrant child told her father, “Canada’s not a country, it’s a refugee camp“.
Communist Bertrand, an ideological heir and successor of Lévesque, is now trying to save, not the “economic, ethnic, linguistic aspirations of French Canada (meaning the French Canadians). Now he is trying to save the “French language in America”.
In the early era of the Communist attack on Quebec, the effort was supposedly to “save” the French Canadians themselves “from” Canada. Save them, their ethnicity, their culture, and their language. Much of their culture derived from their Catholic roots. However, in the mid-1960s in Quebec, the Reds eliminated the constitutionally mandated Catholic and Protestant public schools, also called “separate schools”. This paved the way for mass immigration of hundreds of foreign races of all religious beliefs. Essentially, you can teach anyone to speak French, but the authentic culture of the French Canadians had its rug pulled by Rhodes Scholars working with the left for Communist world government.
Thus, the order of the day is to force all these foreigners to speak 200+ kinds of pidgin French, while distracting everyone from the fact that Communists — above and below — are dismantling Canada.
As long as everyone speaks French, the Reds can still pretend Quebec is a “distinct society” (although not because it’s French Canadian) for the purpose of “international state recognition”, and “secede” to force the “rest of Canada” to “restructure itself” into the top half of the Communist regional union: the North American Soviet Union, under construction in North America for decades. However, it is lagging behind Mikhail Gorbachev’s slowly restructured New European Soviet.
SUBSCRIBE for Part II.
______
1 Bertrand c. Québec (Procureur général), filed 11 August 1995 (S.C. 200 05-002117-955) (1995), 127 D.L.R. (4th) 408, (sub nom. Bertrand c. Bégin) [1995] R.J.Q. 2500, 1995 CarswellQue 131 (Que. S.c (4th) 408, (sub nom. Bertrand c. Bégin) [1995] R.J.Q. 2500, 1995 CarswellQue 131 (Que. S.C.)
2 Canadian Multiculturalism Act ( 1985, c. 24 (4th Supp.))
= = =
Foreword:
It should be no surprise that René Lévesque himself called his plan for the re-federation of Canada with a (temporarily) sovereign Quebec both a new “
CANADA How The Communists Took Control 