“Did Radicals Aim to Overthrow Government?”  Soviet Agent Jean-Pierre Goyer “Blows Whistle” on Red Friends of Red Mole Pierre Trudeau

Did Radicals Aim To Overthrow Government?

Did Radicals Aim To Overthrow Government?  The Winnipeg Free Press, 27 January 1977, Front Page.

This article, “Did Radicals Aim To Overthrow Government?”, in the The Winnipeg Free Press of 27 January 1977, is careful to exclude most names of individuals and of the “radical” organization subject of Solicitor-General Jean-Pierre Goyer’s “letter” “warning” government departments of subversive activities.  However, the reference to a $68,000 federal-government grant to the “radical group” by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, identifies the unnamed radical organization working to overthrow the government of Canada as Praxis Corporation, also then known as the “Research Institute for Social Change”.

One name the WFP does reveal is that of Walter Rudnicki, described by the WFP as “policy planning director of Central Mortgage and Housing Corp”.  That raises my question, was Rudnicki responsible for the CMHC award to Praxis of the $68,000, its main operating budget?

The question is important because just prior to Rudnicki’s employment with the CMHC, he was an official in the Privy Council Office of Canada which conducts research to advise the Prime Minister.

Rudnicki’s official biography (a short one, to cover his personal and professional archives on file with the Archives, University of Manitoba in Winnipeg), describes his positions with the PCO and then the CMHC this way:

“Rudnicki also worked within government as Secretary of the Social Policy Committee, in the Privy Council Office (PCO), and as a senior policy advisor for Cabinet Minister Robert Andras (1968-1970).  In 1969 he left the PCO and became the Executive Director of the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) and advised the Minister on housing and urban development.”

Rudnicki will figure in an upcoming post on the Edmund Burke Society, founded in 1967 by three men, including University of Toronto student, F. Paul Fromm as an “anticommunist” group.  Information that I currently have indicates that Walter Rudnicki exposed the Edmund Burke Society as a national police operation (a front) of the federal government of Canada.  Therefore, this initial post will help to connect Rudnicki himself to the Trudeau federal government.

In this article in the 1977 Winnipeg Free Press, Jean-Pierre Goyer, Solicitor General in 1971, identifies Rudnicki as one of 21 “subversives” linked to the Communist Praxis Corporation, working to overthrow the government of Canada.  Somehow, Rudnicki cleared himself, and returned to work for the federal government and its agencies.

Meanwhile, why did Solicitor-General Jean-Pierre Goyer decide to blow the whistle, naming some twenty-one individuals as likely “radicals” (subversives) involved in a plot at Praxis to overthrow the government of Canada?  The question is important, because, as American anticommunist Alan Stang reveals in the April 1971 issue of American Opinion, Jean-Pierre Goyer himself was a communist.  Said Stang:

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.  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.

In the same long article, in a section headed “The Poor War Revolution”, Stang also talks about Praxis.  He says, “Praxis is what the Communists call an “agit-prop” outfit (agitation and propaganda), egging people on to Marxist revolution.”

The Poor People’s Conference run by Praxis had been financed by the federal government of Pierre Elliott Trudeau through funds contributed by Trudeau’s Minister of Health and Welfare John Munro, through such federal agencies as the National Council of Welfare.

Stang quotes from a speech by Alex Bandy to the Poor People’s Conference run by Jerry [Ferry] Hunnius via Praxis:

“… The way Munro tells it, the government is really, secretly, on our side.  It’s everybody else who is against us and that’s why the government can’t help us.  So, the master plan is to give us money to organize and demonstrate and win popular support, then the government will move ….”  [Emphases added.]

Obviously, the de facto federal government of Pierre Elliott Trudeau was not at all hostile to Praxis Corporation.

Stang describes the kind of “social change” that Praxis “radicals” were working for:

… in March, 1970, Praxis had run another conference, on “industrial democracy,” at which Gerry Hunnius, who runs Praxis, said workers should “control the means and processes of production.”  What that means, said Hunnius, is this:  “It should be obvious that a fully operational system of workers’ self-management cannot operate within a Capitalist system …. ”

In October, 1970, Praxis had run still another Conference — this one on “Workers’ Control and Community Control” — at which a demand was made to destroy Capitalism by revolution.  Capitalism would be replaced by “radical Socialism.”  Confrontation is obsolete, the conferees were told.  What they should do now is “infiltrate,” and, like “microbes,” destroy Canada from within.”

Furthermore, Stang links Hunnius to Pierre Elliott Trudeau:

It is interesting to note that in 1962, Gerry Hunnius, who runs Praxis, which ran the Conference Pierre paid for, was in Moscow at the World Congress for General Disarmament and Peace, sponsored by the Communist World Peace Council – which had sponsored Trudeau’s trip to Moscow ten years before.  In 1963, Hunnius went to work as European representative of the Canadian Peace Research Institute, which the Canada Council supports with public funds — and two directors of which, at one time, were Trudeau and Pelletier.  Another director, named in 1962, was Communist Jean-Louis Gagnon.  [Emphases added.]

Which brings us full-circle to our equally Communist Solicitor-General, and back to my question, why would Jean-Pierre Goyer (appointed by Trudeau “when Parliament was not in session and could not question him” said Stang) “blow the whistle” on the radicals at Praxis?  Goyer himself, like Pierre Elliott Trudeau and Jean-Louis Gagnon are penetrated Communists working “like microbes” to “destroy Canada” … for the Yugoslav system of Communist “worker control” or “industrial democracy”.

According to my original research, the Trudeau objective is excactly the Praxis objective:  Yugoslav-style Communist “Worker Control”, aka “industrial democracy” of the kind practiced under Marshall Tito.  That information comes from a reading of the 1972 manifesto of the Parti Québécois for a Communist state of Quebec — which I have translated into English — together with a 1972 Radio-Canada transcript and audio tape — which I have also translated into English — in which the manifesto is identified as calling for Yugoslav-style Communism for Quebec.

For a free download of the 1972 manifesto and the radio show in one zip file, see the Download button on the top menu.

Furthermore, the Parti Québécois was set up by Lévesque (1967-1968) on orders of Trudeau and other embedded Reds under Soviet Agent Lester Bowles Pearson.  That news emerges from a 1967 dispatch of American CIA agent Edward C. Bittner, then stationed in Ottawa; confirmed by Jean-François Lisée (a main PQ strategist and prolific author of state-funded political pot-boilers) in circa 1990 by interviews with parties mentioned in the dispatch.  the Bittner dispatch, said Lisée, revealed the existence of a “secret committee” of “Liberals”  most being cabinet ministers from Quebec in the Lester Pearson federal government.  On the committee were Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Jean Marchand, Maurice Sauvé and others  [translation]:

“the Committee encouraged René Lévesque and his sympathisers within and outside the Liberal Party of Québec to set up a distinct party, which would be soundly defeated in an electoral showdown.”  [Emphasis added.]

“Electoral” meaning “referendum”.  And thus we have the true source of our Quebec “independence” or “sovereignty” referendums.

Obviously, the “radicals'” plan to penetrate and destroy Canada “like microbes” had long been well under way at the federal level.  Lester Bowles Pearson was in fact a Soviet agent, exposed in the U.S. McCarran hearings and to the FBI by defecting GRU Elizabeth Bentley (formerly with Soviet military intelligence).

Jean-François Lisée — a known Communist — is now the elected leader of the Communist PQ [7 October 2016], succeeding multimillionaire Pauline Marois, Lucien Bouchard, Bernard Landry, Jacques Parizeau and René Lévesque in their goal of making the province of Quebec into a Communist banana republic attached to the “rest of Canada” and to the “USA” by “trade agreements”.

I have read that the Canada Council was actually funded or majority funded from the outset by David Rockefeller (whose Chase Manhattan bank co-funded the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution), but I haven’t got the footnote handy right now.  However, and cautiously, a few words on Praxis from the Lyndon Larouche group.  “Former” Marxist Lyndon Larouche’s Executive Intelligence Review (EIR) of July 12, 1977, Vol. IV, No. 28 (ISSN 0146-9614), referring to EIR’s own research (“Praxis:  The Institute for Policy Studies’ Canadian Extension”), has alleged:

A preliminary investigation of the actual nature of the Praxis Corp. network reveals it to be the centerpiece in a broad-based, largely Rockefeller-inspired, conspiracy directed at all phases of the Canadian policy making process.  Information on Praxis and associated networks gathered in Canada and gridded against the extensively documented activities of the terrorist controllers at the U.S.-based Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) both in North America and in Europe show the Praxis Corp. to be an IPS-Canadian front organization.

The EIR concludes:

This iden­tification, matched in turn against known official Rockefeller policy options for Canada, allows the ef­ficient assemblage of the complete profile of Rockefeller and allied network agencies of subversion directed at Canadian national sovereignty.

 
READ The Winnipeg Free Press:  “Did Radicals Aim To Overthrow Government?” (27 January 1977.
 
READ “Goyer Cites Destructive ‘New Left'”, also on the front page.

Communist Guy Bertrand’s New Plan to Smash Quebec into Communist Regions (Part I)

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

A young Guy Bertrand, candidate for the Communist Parti Québécois

It is also very important, before you read the manifesto, to read the CBC Radio Roundtable of the same year, 1972, discussing the manifesto. This makes it absolutely clear, from the criticisms brought by professional employers and business people, that the PQ manifesto is Communist, on the model of a Soviet satellite in Eastern Europe. Then read the manifesto.

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.

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.

Communists have grabbed the feet and the shoulders of the country, and are rushing to toss it into the new regional pool. They are all after the same thing: dismantling Canada, dismantling the Provinces, dismantling the Territories, destroying the Provincial and Territorial Legislatures and the last vestige of the Parliament, for a regionalized, Sovietized, continental, multicultural regional union that has nothing to do with the British North America Act of 1867, and will end in the full recolonization of Canada and the destruction of its Founding Peoples.

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

Quebec City lawyer, and veiled Communist, Guy Bertrand

I have studied Guy Bertrand’s so-called law suit1 in depth. One of the judges used in that fraud is a man who actively participated behind the scenes in the first major stage of the final overthrow of Canada — the fraud of the so-called “patriation” of 1982, which was not a patriation, but a constitutional and parliamentary coup d’état. I’m referring to Quebec Superior Court judge Robert Lesage who took part in the Canadian Bar Association’s criminally seditious “Committee on the Constitution” from 1976-1979, financed largely by a tax-free foundation, and stage-managed by Rhodes Scholar and future judge of the post-coup Supreme Court of Canada, Gérard Vincent La Forest.

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

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

A thorough analysis of Mr. Bertrand’s 1995 file indicates he has no “interest”. Therefore, the also spurious “judgments” of Robert Lesage, and of Judge Robert Pidgeon in that file, are legally non-existent because they never had jurisdiction in the absence of “legal interest” — meaning “sufficient interest” — by Mr. Bertrand.

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.

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.

As to Mr. La Forest and the CBA committee’s “Towards A New Canada” of 1979, there is no legal authorization in the lawful British North America Act of 1867 to replace Confederation with any other entity, including one so vaguely referred to as “A New Canada”, and obviously meaning Communism.

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

Guy Bertrand’s “Liberté-Nation” Project for a Regionalized Federal Quebec

On Monday, 8 April 2014, Guy Bertrand published a “New Edition” of his French book entitled Projet Liberté-Nation, subtitled: “Plan d’affaires pour réaliser l’indépendance du Québec tout en conservant notre part du Canada“. Translation: Liberty-Nation Project, Business Plan to Achieve the Independence of Quebec while Conserving our Share of Canada.

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

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:

  • Study of needs and expediency
  • Market study and impacts
  • Feasibility study
  • Strategic marketing and communications plan
  • Scale model of the country of Quebec
  • Action plan

A) Regions
B) Liberal Party of Quebec
C) Parti Québécois

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.

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.

What these people do not realize is that a “secret committee” of the Communist-infested federal Liberals, in the reign of Soviet agent Lester Bowles Pearson (Prime Minister in 1967), met on Friday nights in downtown Montreal on the business premises of Power Corporation of Canada. That secret committee created the Parti Québécois. They instructed René Lévesque to set it up as a coalition of the left and the far left, while calling it “moderate”, and lead it so that the federal level could “fight it”… in a referendum.

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, <b>ethnic</b>, linguistic, aspirations

René Lévesque’s Communist Compromise: restructure all of Canada for French-Canadian “economic, ethnic, linguistic, aspirations

Let’s put that appeal to a “final effort” in historical context and see how the pretext for Quebec “sovereignty” has been changed over time. On 10 November 1964 in an old black & white film clip, Communist René Lévesque — who was then a minister in the Quebec Liberal government of Jean Lesage (that had been furiously working on a Communist Plan to run Quebec since 1961) — called to “fundamentally restructure” all of Canada. During the interview, an obviously leftist and partisan CBC journalist prompted Lévesque:

“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.))

= = =

More on Willy Brandt, René Lévesque and the Socialist International

René Lévesque - Attendez que je me rappelle...

In my post of January 4th, 2015, I published the first English translation of a 1982 letter of René Lévesque to the Socialist International (SI), scooped from the unpublished files of the Parti Québécois by the Fédération des Québécois de souche (FQS).

Let’s take another look at that letter.

The New American (Tuesday, 01 March 2011 15:40) in its article by Christian Gomez (“Involvement of Socialist International in 2011 Protests”), describes the origins of the Socialist International:

“Initially founded in Paris in 1889, the Second (or Socialist) International was led by Friedrich Engels — until his death in 1895 — in conjunction with other leaders. After being dissolved on the eve of the First World War, the SI, although by then committed to the ideals of Leon Trotsky*, reorganized in 1951, serving as an ally to the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact communist satellite republics.”

Source: http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-mainmenu-26/africa-mainmenu-27/6516-involvement-of-socialist-international-in-2011-protests

Backup @ Calameo: http://en.calameo.com/read/000747447955ecbba25a9

Friedrich Engels was a Socialist who wrote the Communist Manifesto with Karl Marx in 1848.

The New American goes on:

“During its 1962 Congress in Oslo, Norway, the Socialist International officially publicized its aims abroad, declaring, ‘The ultimate objective of the parties of the Socialist International is nothing less than world government,’ adding, “Membership of the United Nations must be made universal.”

The text of the Declaration of the Socialist International endorsed at the Council Conference held in Oslo on 2-4 June 1962, is online at the web site of the SI, itself.

Source: http://www.socialistinternational.org/viewArticle.cfm?ArticleID=2133

Backup @ Calameo: http://en.calameo.com/books/000747447c87ba69f7cac

It says:

“SOCIALISM AND WORLD PEACE

“The ultimate objective of the parties of the Socialist International is nothing less than world government. As a first step towards it, they seek to strengthen the United Nations so that it may become more and more effective as an instrument for maintaining peace.”

Again, The New American:

“Several years later, in 1976, Willy Brandt — the former Chancellor of West Germany who was forced to resign in 1974 after he was exposed as an agent of the Stasi, the KGB-backed secret police of communist East Germany — became the President of the SI, serving as its longest-running leader from 1976 to 1992….”

 

The Parti Québécois Adheres To The Goal
Of World Government:

With respect to both SI congresses, and in particular to the SI’s “1962 Congress in Oslo, Norway”, we note that René Lévesque, at page 1 of his 1982 letter to SI president Willy Brandt, requesting PQ membership in the Socialist International, specifically states, in the second to last paragraph on that page:

“… le Parti Québécois adhère sans aucune restriction aux principes énoncés dans les déclarations de Frankfort (1951) et d’Oslo (1962).”

“… the Parti Québécois adheres without any restriction to the principles enunciated in the declarations of Frankfort (1951) and Oslo (1962).”

Therefore, in 1982 when René Lévesque attempted to admit the Parti Québécois to the Socialist International, he was expressly assuring them of his support for their plan of world government.

Flattr this

 

But this is no surprise. In his Memoirs published in 1986, René Lévesque entitles a brief sub-chapter, “I Am a Federalist”. In that sub-chapter, he explains that he is a federalist “in world terms“. Here is a compressed extract:

KEY EXCERPT: 17. I Am a Federalist [ … ]

“All of this means that on two or three absolutely essential levels, the nation-state has had its day. It must give up part of its powers and resources to an authority that would be a Security Council for humanity at large. It’s not for tomorrow, of course. But if we want to count on a tomorrow, no other solution is in sight. There, at any rate, is what I think, and what I repeat every time I get a chance, and what I’ll risk saying again here: to put an end to the massacre of innocents, to give children everywhere a minimum of equal opportunities, one cannot be anything but federalist… at least in world terms.”

The chapter section can be viewed online, English edition, as published:

“I Am a Federalist” – chapter section in the Memoirs of René Lévesque (published 1986):
http://en.calameo.com/books/000111790e51d4555c0f5

The original chapter section in French, entitled “Je Suis Fédéraliste” – being a section of a chapter in the Memoirs entitled Attendez que je me rappelle… les Mémoires de René Lévesque (also published in 1986), is online here:

http://en.calameo.com/books/0001117901d697922e1af

The pertinent extract in the French-language Mémoires reads as follows (again, compressed to the point):

“Cela signifie que, sur deux ou trois plans absolument existentiels, l’État-nation a fait son temps. Il lui faudra céder cette portion de ses pouvoirs et de ses ressources à une autorité qui soit un Conseil de Sécurité pour l’humanité tout entière. Ce n’est pas demain la veille, bien sûr. Mais si l’on veut compter sur un demain, quelle autre issue ?

Pour ma part, en tout cas, ce que je pense et que je répète à chaque occasion, et que je me risque à écrire ici : pour mettre un vrai holà au massacre des innocents, pour donner aux enfants de partout un minimum d’égalité des chances, on ne peut qu’être fédéraliste. Mondialement parlant…”

René Lévesque was not a nationalist, a sovereignist or a patriot. He was a known Communist and a globalist.

As René Lévesque asserted in his 1982 letter to Willy Brandt, attempting admission of the Parti Québécois to the Socialist International, “… the Parti Québécois adheres without any restriction to the principles enunciated in the declarations of Frankfort (1951) and Oslo (1962).”

However, the Frankfurt Declaration of 1951, at its article 5, states as follows:

“5. In many countries uncontrolled capitalism is giving place to an economy in which state intervention and collective ownership limit the scope of private capitalists. More people are coming to recognise the need for planning. Social security, free trade unionism and industrial democracy are winning ground. This development is largely a result of long years of struggle by Socialists and trade unionists. Wherever Socialism is strong, important steps have been taken towards the creation of a new social order.”

A moderator of the May 9th, 1972 radio broadcast discussing the Parti Québécois manifesto, online at CBC Archives, (transcribed and translated into English here), quoted then-President of Bell Canada, Mr. Robert Scrivener, as characterizing

“this program as ‘dangerous’, ‘unrealistic’, and who envisioned a kind of ‘Apocalypse of Business’, if ever this program, if ever one attempted to apply this program.”

While the radio hosts and others attempted to link the manifesto to Swedish-style socialism, seasoned businessman and President of the Quebec Employers’ Council, Charles Perreault, declared:

“For all practical purposes here, they are going to give to the Government the role it plays in socialist countries in Eastern Europe. They are going to centralize production, they are going to construct plans – uh – coercive plans – and for all practical purposes, as I said – uh – give to the Government total control. And one must expect that the, the, the economy will progress pretty much like that of the Poles or the Czechs or the East Germans.” (11 min. 01 sec.)

Perreault continued:

“This is clearly a coercive – uh – which ref – uh, which represents the kind of, of – of, uh – of system known in socialist countries.

But surely not, surely not (the kind one finds in) Sweden, and surely not in France, either.” (12 min. 34 sec.)

Narciso Pizarro, a Marxist sociologist interviewed in the same broadcast, and who specializes in trade-unionism, admitted that the Parti Québécois manifesto took its inspiration from “the Yugoslav model“. (2 min. 26 sec.) The former Yugoslavia, of course, was a Communist state under Marshal Tito until his death in 1980. Thus, in 1972, at the time of the Parti Québécois manifesto, the plan for Quebec is admittedly Communist.

The Parti Québécois is therefore obviously Communist.

The referendums in Quebec to “secede” are an obvious device to acquire temporary sovereignty sufficient to sign “treaties” undertaking to destroy that same sovereignty in Communist regionalism subject to world government.

That regionalism, intended to stretch horizontally, East-West, with the “rest of Canada” signing on to the “partnership”, is moreover modeled on the regionalism now unfolded in Europe. At the time of the 1980 Quebec referendum it was called the European Economic Community; at the time of the 1995 Quebec referendum, it had become the European Union. By 2001, Mikhail Gorbachev was calling it “The New European Soviet“.

Both referendums failed — despite attempts to rig the outcome — thus the regionalization of North America was pursued vertically, North-South, by means of so-called “trade” deals to incorporate Canada, the USA and Mexico into a single unit. When NAFTA stalled, 9/11 occurred, conveniently kick-starting the final leg of the forced march to North American…. Soviet Union.

Building A North American CommunityIt 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 “Canadian Union” and a new “Canadian Community.” These designations must be familiar…. they are clearly echoed in the Council on Foreign Relations’ 2005 blueprint for “Building A North American Community,” commonly known as the North American Union. They were also based on the European Economic Community, and the European Union.

Moreover, one of the signatories to the 2005 “Building A North American Community” plan is Pierre-Marc Johnson, leader of the Parti Québécois after Lévesque, and therefore the Communist Premier of Quebec. The North American Union, modeled on the European Union — the “New European Soviet” — must therefore be Communist.

As to who really founded the Parti Québécois — because René Lévesque is just the front man — I’ll give you that in another post another day.
______
* Leon Trotsky, also known as “Lev Bronstein”.

– 30 –

Flattr this

 

UPDATE: FREE DOWNLOAD now available for researchers:

Download a FREE 18-MB copy of QUAND NOUS SERONS VRAIMENT CHEZ NOUS

The 7zip folder contains: (1) the AUDIO TAPE of the French CBC radio show discussing the Manifesto; (2) The Table of Contents of the Manifesto (Translated); (3) an 18-MB PDF file of the manifesto (scanned at the law library of the French University of Montreal; (4) an OCR of the manifesto.

QUAND – The PQ Manifesto – PDF file & OCR.zip

OR:

QUAND – The PQ Manifesto – PDF file & OCR.zip

 

 

 

 

George Orwell’s “1984” Meets the Parti Québécois Manifesto of 1972

In an independent, that is a “Communist” Quebec, you will be socialized from birth to grave. You will live the paradise enforced upon Winston Smith in Orwell’s famous portrait of British Socialism (IngSoc) in “1984“. In Quebec, it may be called “QSoc“. Can you tell the difference between words from Orwell’s 1984 and words from the 1972 Communist manifesto of the Parti Québécois?

... the television apparatus automatically incorporated into housing and considered as a public service in the same manner as the aqueduct and the sewer ...

   “… the television apparatus automatically incorporated into housing
          and considered as a public service in the same manner as
                                         the aqueduct and the sewer …”

EN FRANÇAIS : … l’appareil de télévision automatiquement incorporé
au logement et considéré comme un service public au même titre
que l’aqueduc et l’égoût

 
(At least they put the TV in the right category with the “sewer”.) Our ubiquitous home brain-washing machine — for which we now pay and therefore must finance our own indoctrination — will be FREE as a State service of the Communist Parti Québécois! Let’s vote! Can’t wait for the next referendum! (Pssst! I don’t have a TV. Yeeks! I’m an enemy of the Party!) It’s off to Re-education Camp (I mean, the Gulag) for me!

Read my exclusive English translation of “L’Entreprise” “The Company”, pages 67-73 from the 1972 Parti Québécois manifesto, now on the Library tab.

As usual, footnotes are mine; underscores are points for my research; and silver-highlighted text is subject to revision.

A complete scan of the French original of the 1972 manifesto of the Parti Québécois entitled Quand nous serons vraiment chez nous (When we are truly at home) is online to read. Unfortunately, Calaméo no longer allows free downloads.

– 30 –

 

UPDATE: FREE DOWNLOAD now available for researchers:

Download a FREE 18-MB copy of QUAND NOUS SERONS VRAIMENT CHEZ NOUS

The 7zip folder contains: (1) the AUDIO TAPE of the French CBC radio show discussing the Manifesto; (2) The Table of Contents of the Manifesto (Translated); (3) an 18-MB PDF file of the manifesto (scanned at the law library of the French University of Montreal; (4) an OCR of the manifesto.

QUAND – The PQ Manifesto – PDF file & OCR.zip

OR:

QUAND – The PQ Manifesto – PDF file & OCR.zip