The Real Pierre Elliott Trudeau — A Child’s View, in Retrospect

The Real Pierre Elliott Trudeau - A Child's View in RetrospectForeword:

The cartoon-girl is supposed to be me, but actually, I had curly hair. I just couldn’t draw curls in Windows Paint to save my life. And if my grandmother had seen that short red dress, she’d have been letting the hem down overnight and sneak it back into my closet before the morning. But the house and the school are kinda cute, very close to the real things where I grew up and where

I studied for the first seven years of school at Saint Augustine’s of Canterbury. The school was right next door to our Catholic church of the same name, whose bells could be heard ten blocks away in bed, every Sunday morning.

I wrote the script and drew the initial cartoon slides in 2011, intending to make a video. Then my Dell D600 hard drive crashed.

I have learned the hard way not to entrust my hard drives to repair technicians. They have an unfortunate habit of deleting the contents. (Especially when I pay them using my bank card, which is being traced.)

I therefore had to learn (a) to repair my own D600 with second-hand spare parts and “How To” videos from YouTube, (b) instal Windows XP Pro SP3, (c) configure all my own programs, and finally, (d) use various kinds of recovery software to rescue my files from crashed hard drives.

It took me until late in 2013 to recover the drive that crashed in 2011. Among the treasures that I dredged back up was this old, incomplete animated video, a Child’s View of Trudeau.

Only two minutes of the video had been finished out of the 8-10 minutes planned. It would take too long right now to finish it, so pardon me if I grab a few slides to illustrate the gist, and give you the script, below.

Animation and cartoons aside, this is a real story about The Real Pierre Elliott Trudeau — A Child’s View in Retrospect.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

The Story

When I was about 12 or 14 years old, and home from school for the afternoon, I switched on our old black and white floor-model TV, and there was Pierre Elliott Trudeau.

This would be around 1965-1967. Trudeau was not yet Prime Minister. As I was not a political kid, I couldn’t tell you what he was at the time. But, from my reading today, I would say that during that broadcast, he had probably already been recruited by Soviet spy, Prime Minister Lester Pearson, and had been or would soon be elected to Parliament as a so-called “Liberal” and enter Pearson’s cabinet.

This was on channel 6 or 12 (CBC or CTV in Montreal, Canada). We had rabbit ears and picked up only channels 2 and 10 (which were French), and 6, 12, 3 and 5 (which were English; but 3 and 5 were American, ABC and NBC).

So, I suspect that Trudeau was on channel 6 at the time, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, a national “news” and entertainment network formed by federal statute, the Canadian Broadcasting Act, 1936 and By-Laws. (In other words, looking back, this was Canada’s Pravda.)

So, there was Trudeau in a suit being interviewed. He was describing his ideal society. And, again, looking back, he must have been testing the waters; for, as he never openly discussed it again, in these terms, he must have decided that viewer response was not sufficiently favorable to openly  inflict Communism on Canada.

I know I remember this pretty well, because after the show, I quickly descended the basement stairs of our wholly-owned non-mortgaged duplex at 2264 Hingston Avenue in NDG to the old Underwood manual typewriter, and I wrote a funny story about Trudeau’s ideal society.

I called my story “CLANADA”, with an “L” in it; that’s not a typo.

However, back to Trudeau — and keep in mind, I could write this as an affidavit.

In Trudeau’s ideal society, there would be no private property. You would own nothing. You would not even own the chair you sat in to watch Mr. Trudeau on television. And obviously, you would not own the television.

Because, said Trudeau, there would be no stores. You could not buy things any more. Instead, you would go to a central warehouse run by the government where you would receive all you need, which is to say, all that government decided  you need. You would exchange a chit for this, which the government had issued.

For example, said Trudeau, in this warehouse there would be only a few models of couches, beds and chairs, and a limited assortment of pictures to put on your wall. The purpose of this limitation in style and variety was “equality”. Said Trudeau, people would be “equal” only if they all owned nothing and had the mere use of pretty much the same “things”.

Keep in mind, this is coming from a man who when he finally left the home owned by his mother, bought himself a mansion which he later fitted with an indoor swimming pool. Newspaper columnist Peter Worthington suspected the pool was at Canadian taxpayers’ expense, although it was said to have been a gift of wealthy businessmen. (If the latter is true, perhaps the wealthy capitalists were “equalizing” one of their own with themselves.) Therefore, Mr. Trudeau, his wife and his own children, did not have to mingle with the “equal” people at the low-brow community swimming pool.

pool

Mr. Trudeau certainly did not live the lifestyle he recommended for others.

One would therefore have to think that Trudeau did not consider himself “equal” to others. Apparently, in his ideal society, he would be “more equal” — as no doubt would friends of his who also lived up the hill in pool-equipped mansions, or in posh Westmount homes.

As a kid, I didn’t know what Communism was, so I really just thought Trudeau was crazy.

I snorted and chuckled with amusement as I banged out my child’s satire of the great man’s views for Canada on my grandfather’s old Underwood — which in Trudeau’s ideal world, I would not have the use of, due to abolition of inheritance, and more importantly, laws against criticizing Communism. (As a child-intellectual with all the wrong views, I’d have been quickly sent for “re-education”. But I know for sure, it wouldn’t have worked. I’d have ended up, like Vladimir Bukovsky, in lunatic asylums for penning politically incorrect views about the North American Union, and slurring the Canadian Commisars.)

The story I wrote was of Trudeau’s ideal country, where you didn’t even own the bed you slept in.

Moreover, in my story, you had to share  your bed with a neighbour, because it rolled through the wall in the morning, into the next apartment, to be slept in by someone else coming home from his shift at the workplace.

I no longer have a copy of that story, and I can’t remember any more details. But, obviously, today, I know for sure that Pierre Elliott Trudeau was a Communist. Which is to say, he merely advocated  Communism for the rest of us. (It just took Alan Stang to remind me.)

– 30 –

 

UPDATE 26 November 2015: Researchers can now DOWNLOAD files of all chapters of the 1972 Parti Québécois Manifesto for a Communist State of Quebec, that I have translated into English to date. That is 90% of it, more than is currently posted online in html. This links expires in 5 days from 26 Nov 2015. I will try to replace it as necessary:

https://www.sendspace.com/file/31b9n3

 

Soviet Agent Oscar D. Skelton Recruited Soviet Agent Lester Bowles Pearson into the Civil Service of Canada

Foreword

In his 1982 pamphlet entitled “Inside the Featherbed File? … “, former undercover RCMP Officer, Patrick Walsh, gave a cameo image of Oscar D. Skelton.

Walsh reports that in the “Featherbed” file, other RCMP Officers claim to have established that the “Father of Canada’s Civil Service”, meaning Skelton, was a Soviet agent, a recruit of Louis Kon of the USSR’s infamous Comintern.

Walsh also alludes to a short reference on Skelton in Peter C. Newman’s The Canadian Establishment. Said Walsh:

In his best-seller, The Canadian Establishment, Peter C. Newman gives only a superficial thumbnail sketch of comrade Oscar Skelton: “During the next 16 years, Skelton founded and built up Canada’s External Affairs department and as MacKenzie King’s closest adviser became the most important civil servant in Ottawa.” In his Appendix I dealing with Ottawa’s Mandarins, there is only a mere mention of Skelton’s belonging to the Rideau Club and having taught at Queen’s University, and no mention of his membership in the Canadian-Soviet Friendship Society & how he also enticed* MacKenzie King to join!

Walsh continues:

Skelton was careful to groom only pro-Soviet civil servants in the External Affairs Department. Most of them were being briefed by the Canadian Institute of International Affairs (CIIA), the Canadian branch of the notorious pro-Soviet Institute of Pacific Relations. Many of them (including Lester B. Pearson) saw service in Washington & London where their counterparts were also members of Soviet espionage rings.

According to declassified parts of the infamous Silvermaster spy file, Elizabeth Bentley, an American who had worked for the Soviets in military intelligence defected back to America and was debriefed on a number of occasions, including by the U.S. McCarran Committee and by agents of the New York Office of the FBI in 1951.

Bentley revealed that Lester (akaMike”) Pearson, a “highly placed Canadian government official” in “the Canadian Embassy in Washington” in 1943 and 1944, fed information to Soviet military intelligence (i.e., Bentley, herself) on “top level British policy and political matters” through Hazen Size, a “member of the Canadian Film Board in Washington, D. C.” with whom Pearson was “very friendly in Canada”, the two being “connected with left wing circles in that country”.

“By confidential memorandum dated August 27, 1951, Inspector Bayfield of the RCMP was advised of the identical information provided to the Department of State and the Department of Justice under letters of that date” by Elizabeth Bentley.

Nonetheless, Soviet agent Lester Bowles Pearson, who at some point was President of the infamous Canadian Institute of International Affairs (CIIA) which was “briefing” the pro-Soviets hired by Skelton, rose to become Prime Minister of Canada.

The following black and white archival video footage documents the fact that Red agent, Oscar D. Skelton, recruited Red agent Lester Bowles Pearson into Mackenzie King’s federal civil service.

TRANSCRIPT:

Lester (Mike) Pearson, M.A.

Lester (Mike) Pearson, M.A.


Narrator: Armed with his M.A., Mike (aka Lester Bowles Pearson) returned to Canada, and the next few years found him lecturing in history and coaching sports at the University of Toronto.

But, off in Ottawa, a Dr. O. D. Skelton was Deputy Minister of a new department called External Affairs.

He intruded into the academic life and asked Mike to write a civil service examination.

O. D. Skelton and Lester (Mike) Bowles Pearson

O. D. Skelton and Lester (Mike) Bowles Pearson

Lester Pearson: It was one of the top positions in this new department. And I thought it would be a good thing to write. I didn’t have any particular intention of taking the job. But I thought it’d be interesting to write it. And uh — I never can resist a competition.

Lester (Mike) Pearson, M.A. (class)

Lester (Mike) Pearson, M.A. (class)

Narrator: He won. It was 1927. Mackenzie-King was Prime Minister, and it was Canada’s Diamond Jubilee when Mike Pearson came to Ottawa.

Mackenzie-King was Prime Minister

Mackenzie-King was Prime Minister

Lester Pearson: I was uh — I had rather a kind of a — exalted idea of foreign offices and diplomacy from reading books. And uh, I considered I had achieved a pretty — a position pretty high — of professional distinction. I was now almost a diplomat, and, perhaps I was a little too impressed by my transition.

Parliament Buildings, Ottawa (1927)

Parliament Buildings, Ottawa (1927)

I remember going into the door — through the door at the East Block behind Dr. Skelton and the guard saluted Dr. Skelton smartly and paid no attention to me whatever. I thought, well, obviously, he doesn’t know who I am.

Well, he didn’t pay any attention to me for a good many years.

– 30 –
 

______
* Quite frankly, I doubt that Mackenzie King was “enticed” into the Canadian-Soviet Friendship Society. I think he walked in happily. Nor do I believe he was merely the “docile puppet” that some have made him out to be. King was a long-time protégé of the infamous American financiers of the bloody Bolshevik “revolution” (military coup on Russia) in 1979: the moneybag Rockefellers. The Rockefellers’ oil empire in America was financed by the equally if not more infamous Rothschilds of Europe who also financed the 1917 war of the Jews upon Russia. The Rockefellers maintained a leash on their Liberal poodle Mackenzie King by employing him in between his elected mandates. In a like manner, Power Corporation of Canada today, whose top men sit on the Board and Senate of the CIIA which was briefing the Reds recruited by Skelton, have kept all their own political dogs well fed between stints in the Prime Minister’s Office — (i.e., Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Jean Chrétien, Paul Martin Junior). All these men, as well as other coddled agents of the supercapitalists, have been involved in merging North America into a Leninist regional union). Ed. NSIM.

Read more on Skelton in Patrick Walsh’s “Inside the Featherbed File?“:

 

Red Fronts Aid Planned Merger of Canada North-South and East-West into a Red Regional Union

Soviet Agent
Lester Bowles (“Mike”) Pearson
“Prime Minister of Canada”

ACTION PLAN

ACTION PLAN

Phase I – Horizontal (Regional) Integration of Canada

Phase II – Vertical (Regional) Integration of Canada

Pearson’s Red Cabinet Ministers & als from Quebec

Pearson’s Red Cabinet
Minister
from Ontario

“Liberals”:

Pierre Elliott Trudeau

Jean Marchand

Maurice Sauvé

& Claude Frénette (Sauvé former assistant, now a VP at Power Corporation)

The Secret Committee of Red Liberals at Power Corporation (1967)

L-R: Pearson,
Marchand, Sauvé, Trudeau, part of the “secret committee” of Red “Liberals” at Power Corporation of Canada

“Liberal”

Paul Hellyer

(helped Soviet Pearson merge Canada’s 3-branched Armed Forces into one command)

Paul Hellyer, Minister of National Defence under Soviet Agent Pearson, and then under Pilgrim of Moscow, Pierre Elliott Trudeau

Paul Hellyer, Minister of National Defence under Soviet Agent Pearson, and then under Pilgrim of Moscow, Pierre Elliott Trudeau


 

Order the
creation of a
COMMUNIST FRONT party in Quebec, the “separatist” Parti Québécois (PQ) [1968]. (aka “nationalist”
for Quebec)

 

Parti Québécois (Communist front)

 

Creates a
COMMUNIST FRONT party, the pro-“sovereignty and independence” (for Canada) Canadian Action Party (CAP) [1997]. (aka “nationalist” for Canada)

Canadian Action Party (Communist front)

Trudeau-Marchand-Sauvé appoint known Communist René Lévesque to set it up, and lead it.

Hellyer quits; known Communist Constance Clara Fogal Rankin then leads it.

PQ is formed by merger of 2-3 left & far-left “parties”, including the RN and the RIN.

CAP under Hellyer attempts to merge with federal NDP (a full-member party of the Socialist International working for a socialist world government) (Obviously, the CAP is not working for “Canadian sovereignty”.)

Behind the PQ is a Communist Manifesto in French only, never covered by the English-speaking press and broadcast media. The manifesto, entitled Quand nous serons vraiment chez nous, calls for a Communist State of Quebec attached to Canada and the USA by treaties and accords. It calls for a planned economy, centralized production, state control of all businesses, and the “extirpation of individual liberty” as known in so-called “Liberal” western societies.

Behind the CAP is a globalist, world-government religion channeled by a member of a Skull & Bones family. The Urantia Book (their “bible”) sanctifies the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and calls for a world government so that Earth can join “galactic society” – consisting of countless alien worlds who also have world governments. The President of the CAP preaches Urantia, and maintains countless web sites on it, featuring Jesus, the Flag of Israel, and the flag of the United Nations.

The PQ demands a “democratic vote” in Quebec to “secede” if Canada won’t refederate with Quebec on the EEC-EU model.

The CAP demands a “democratic vote” in Canada (Parliament, and Canadians in general) to stop Canada’s being annexed into USA and Mexico on the EEC-EU model.

However, constitutionally speaking, “secession” is impossible.

However, constitutionally speaking, annexation is impossible.

Therefore, in both cases, the “democratic vote” is to trick the people into [1] refederating Canada East-West on the EEC-EU Regional Red model; [2] annexing Canada North-South into the EEC-EU Regional Red Model (“Building a North American Community”), hoping Canadians will never realize the Constitution forbids both these things, and there is no “option” to do either. The answer is “No” from the Constitution; and legally, the people have no constitutional authority to defy the Constitution by voting “Yes”.

The result of both these operations by Communist Front Parties will be a Red Regionalized continent, the North American Soviet Union.

Unless Canadians wake up.

Crossover occurs between these two Red Fronts in 1996 when we find Communist Comrade Connie Fogal Rankin and her Stalinist husband, Harry Rankin, consorting out west with Quebec City lawyer Guy Bertrand, a founding member of the Communist Parti Québécois, who once ran for its leadership, and who filed a phony "law suit" (the legal term is “nullity”) in Quebec City in 1995 to aid and abet the 1995 PQ referendum to dismantle Canada for East-West regional union. Since 2014, Bertrand has been pushing Quebec "independence" to immediately regionalize (Communize) Quebec by "seceding". Out West in 1996, Fogal, Harry, and Bertrand are working together on the North-South regional merger (the North American Soviet Union, mislabeled NAFTA), by bamboozling Prairie and Western Canadians in public seminars delivered by these leftists. Their coterie includes “Red Tory” David Orchard.

“Fighting to Save Canada”: A Communist Facade

The COVER story used by these Red Agents is always: “Fighting to Save Canada“. Red Mole Trudeau used the ploy to justify his challenging René Lévesque to a referendum to dismantle Canada.

Communist Guy Bertrand used the ploy to justify filing his phony “law suit” in 1995, which was not a real law suit, but a set-up with our occupied courts to ensure the dismantling of Canada after a “Yes”.

Hellyer used the ploy in 1997 to set up a “nationalist” party to “fight for” Canadian “sovereignty” against NAFTA and the incoming North American (Soviet) Union.

Close colleague of Fogal, Rankin and Bertrand, “Red Tory” David Orchard, has been making a killing for years selling one edition after another of his book “The Fight for Canada – Four Centuries of Resistance to American Expansionism,” The implication being that Canada is capable of being lost. Orchard’s alleged goal is to save Canada from so-called “Free Trade” and “NAFTA”, which in truth is Red regional annexation, exactly what the left subverters are pursuing.

For David’s information (which he already knows and is ignoring), the “Fight for Canada” was won, definitively, in 1867 with enactment of the British North America Act, still Canada’s one and only lawful Constitution which legally prohibits the annexation of Canada, and secession to dismantle it.

Just how Red is David Orchard? Red enough to be expected to lead the CAP. The Blog at the Canadian Action Party reveals:

“The CAP lost their founder in 2003 when he decided to leave after a merger with the New Democratic Party (founded in 1961) fell through, which would have seen the NDP change its name. The transition of power was not smooth, and the mantle eventually fell on Con­nie Fogal, a Canadian activist and lawyer. The original successor to Hellyer was supposed to be David Orchard, a prominent Canadian political figure and author, but he failed to re­spond when the opportunity presented itself. Fogal stayed at the helm for approximately three years, but also walked away from the position in 2008. Her successor was a relative unknown named Andrew J. Moulden, who officially took over control after the 2008 elec­tion.” [Accessed approx. 13 August 2015]

Maybe the flying saucer thing put David off. Hellyer’s been chasing flying saucers, calling the U.S. military “paranoid” for refusing to befriend “the Aliens”. The whole back end of the CAP is into Urantia, including Moulden, who quit to join the Christian Heritage Party. And this, despite the prospect (discovered in a memo leaked from his leader’s desk at the CAP) of his becoming “King of the New World Order“.)

Meanwhile, you can buy a copy of David’s book from him and fill his pockets with proceeds from sedition: his flat-out lie that Canada is capable of being “lost”. The Constitution needs to be enforced, that’s all. But, if you are misled by David and his Communist pals, you will bite your fingernails to the quick at the edge of your seat while Canada circles the Red Drain. Instead, you should be running to Court to assert Canada’s constitutional sovereignty which no government has any power to sell, trade, or abdicate.

Goodbye, Canada: “The Nation’s Deathbed”

Another ploy of these Tools of Moscow is to mislead Canadians psychologically into accepting the demise of their country. In 19xx, Paul Hellyer published a book titled: “Goodbye, Canada” (Adieu, Canada, in French: don’t miss those sales!). The implication being that Canada is being lost, and is therefore capable of being lost.

Close colleagues of the CAP and of Comrade Connie Fogal are the film makers, PressforTruth.ca who made a feature movie called: “The Nation’s Deathbed” in which a funeral is held for Canada. These are talented young people who have produced other very interesting documentary footage. I have no desire to link them as voluntarily in league with Communist Fogal and the Hellyer Reds. Up to now, my only impression is that the people at PressforTruth.ca are being misled by the quite convincing interventions of these very slippery Communist operators.

It’s easy to be misled, at least temporarily. Back in 2005, when I first became aware of the North American Union, I searched the Web and signed up to Connie Fogal’s emailing list. I had no clue she was a Communist. I had no idea the Marxist-Leninist party of Canada follows Connie and her Red World pals wherever they go, cheering positively.

One day, an email arrived from Connie which sounded terrifying. Its contents emitted an aura of impending military invasion of Canada by the New World Order. A tiny airport landing strip, she said, in north Vancouver had just been widened, for the purpose of landing military vehicles. That got my attention.

I therefore tracked down the little airport online and wrote to them, asking for confirmation of Connie Fogal’s email. I got to the head man, who was non-plussed, and whose office in the tower overlooks the airfield. It had not been widened. I transferred the news to Ms. Fogal and asked for an explanation. None was forthcoming; only silence. I therefore unsubscribed from Connie Fogal’s emailing list.

Eventually, I found Connie posting my face and my campaign (Habeas Corpus Canada), in forums, but with her  name, phone, fax and email, asking people to contact her, as if my campaign were a CAP adjunct. By that time, Connie was gone from the CAP, so I wrote to Andrew Moulden, the new CAP leader, and invited the CAP in no uncertain terms to stop using my face and campaign with their email, phone & fax, and come up with their own promotional material. One forum where I asked to have Connie’s post using my name and face removed, did, indeed, remove it. If there are still others out there, they are not there with my knowledge or permission.

In Conclusion

All of these “Fighting to Save Canada” fronts are Communist ploys to divert Canadians away from the courts, and distract us from the answer to all our problems: The Constitution. The solution to events is legal, not “political”.

 

Trudeau Biographers Ignore Known Red Agents in Canada’s External Affairs Department

Pierre Elliott Trudeau

 

 
In their chapter on millionaire Pierre Trudeau’s first paid job in the Privy Council Office of Canada in the late 1940s and early 50s,1 authors Max and Monique Nemni, at page 214, quote Trudeau criticizing an official speech of Lester Bowles Pearson on the Communist menace:
 

“Soit M. Pearson n’est pas au courant de ces rapports, auquel cas il ne fait pas son travail. Soit il est au courant et il conteste la véracité, auquel cas il est coupable d’avoir confié des missions à deux agents du service extérieure qui ne sont que des laquais crédules des Soviétiques. À moins que, convaincu de leur véracité, il préfère continuer de répandre le mythe que les communistes cherchent à provoquer la guerre, auquel cas il trompe la population.”

“Either Mr. Pearson is unaware of these reports, in which case he is not doing his job. Or he is aware and disputes their veracity, in which case he is guilty of having entrusted missions to two agents of the external service who are nothing but the credulous lackeys of the Soviets. Unless, convinced of their veracity, he prefers to continue to spread the myth that the Communists seek to cause war, in which case he is misleading the population.”

If you read the whole section, it is clear that Trudeau sides with the “official reports” of John Watkins and Chester Ronning alleging that the USSR is on a pacifist road and like Communist China, is working to better conditions for its citizens. Pierre Elliott Trudeau thus shares their alleged official viewpoint that the USSR is:

“tired of war, pacifist and […] has even begun to demobilize a part of its troops” (1951 report of John Watkins) and that “qualified Chinese leaders […] are busy finding solutions […] for the greatest good of the Chinese people” (1951 report of Chester Ronning).

However, both these men are in fact Reds (which Trudeau denies, by inversion), as will be apparent.

First, in a segment of his 1982 “Inside the ‘Featherbed File’?“, former RCMP undercover agent Patrick Walsh quotes the Edmonton Journal on the subject of Watkins. Says Walsh:

TRUTH IS FINALLY EMERGING

The Edmonton Journal (30 March 1981) concluded an article on Lester Pearson’s cover-up for Soviet spy John Watkins:

“A remaining question is why Pearson and the Liberal hierarchy decided to cover up for Watkins.

“Was it simply because Pearson and Watkins were huge personal friends?’

“If so, this meant that Pearson’s own priorities came ahead of those of Canadians in general.

“Or was it because letting one skeleton out of the closet would lead to many more exposures and create shattering embarrassment for the Liberal bureaucracy?”

That article is from March, 1981. The Nemnis are publishing Trudeau’s biography in 2011, when this information is available to researchers. Yet, the Nemnis — who have also taken over publication of Trudeau and Pelletier’s infamous pro-Red Cité Libre — offer the reader no clue that Watkins indeed was a Red agent.

But so is Chester Ronning!  In a 1971 article, “The Men Who Control Canada” by F. Paul Fromm, published in the journal of the Edmund Burke Society, we learn that in October 1970, the Trudeau government conferred diplomatic recognition on Mao’s dictatorship. Fromm then points out that:

“[o]ne of those who had long propagandized for such recognition was former diplomat, Chester Ronning, Bilderberger (1955, 1956). In his book, THE RED FOG OVER AMERICA, Commander Guy Carr says that Ronning joined the revolutionary army of Sun Yat Sen in China in 1911 and worked under the direct orders of Michael Borodin, the envoy of the Comintern in China…. After Ronning arrived in Canada he openly formed the I.P.R. and infiltrated into Mr. Pearson’s Department of External Affairs…. Ronning is a personal friend of Chou En Lai and Mao Tse Tung (page 213).

U.S. Senator Barry M. Goldwater (1979)2 has this to say about Ronning’s “I.P.R.“, the infamous Institute of Pacific Relations:

The international bankers’ C.F.R. is disarming America while they finance the world’s largest military machine in Soviet Russia.

“Starting in the ’30s and continuing through World War II, our official attitude toward the Far East reflected the thinking of the Institute of Pacific Relations. Members of the Institute were placed in important teaching positions. They dominated the Asian affairs section of the State Department. Their publications were standard reading material for the armed forces, in most American colleges, and were used in 1,300 public school systems.

The Institute of Pacific Relations was behind the decision to cut off aid to Chiang Kai-Shek unless he embraced the Communists, and the Council on Foreign Relations is the parent organization of the Institute of Pacific Relations.”

— Source: Goldwater Sees Elitist Sentiments Threatening Liberties (1979)

“Commander Guy Carr says that Ronning joined the revolutionary army of Sun Yat Sen in China in 1911 and worked under the direct orders of Michael Borodin, the envoy of the Comintern“. What is the “Comintern”? Former undercover RCMP agent, Patrick Walsh, in his Featherbed article in 1982 quotes:

“the outstanding authority on the Comintern, Victor Serge, who broke with Stalin in 1936 after having been an outstanding member of the Executive Committee of the Comintern. In the February, 1947 issue of the magazine Plain Talk, in an article entitled Inside the Comintern, Serge gave this first-hand description of the Comintern:

The central bureaus of the Comintern in Moscow, located in a vast building opposite the Kremlin, guarded by the GPU, became a sort of worldwide intelligence center such as exists in no other country in the world. The central apparatus of the Comintern was subdivided into regional bureaus for the Latin countries, Central Europe, Scandinavia, the Middle East, the Far East, North America, Latin America, etc.

Therefore, Chester Ronning, who answered directly to Michael Borodin, Moscow’s envoy of the Comintern in China”, had been taken directly into Canada’s civil service, External Affairs, while apparently still a Red agent under control of the Comintern. No doubt, his assignment had been switched to North America.

In his January, 1972 report on Bilderberger Mark Gayn (alias Julius Ginsberg), F. Paul Fromm quotes the “REECE COMMITTEE REPORT of the United States House of Representatives” concerning the known activities of the I.P.R. in 1945-1949:

“… the I.P.R. has been considered by the American Communist Party and by Soviet officials as an instrument of Communist policy, propaganda and military intelligence.”

Jaanus Proos, writing in “Praxis Exposed!” for the January-February 1971 issue of Straight Talk!, journal of the Edmund Burke Society, says:

“IPR has been thoroughly unmasked by the US Internal Security Subcommittee as the Red-dominated organization responsible for the sabotaging of US foreign policy against CHIAN Kai-shek and facilitating the Maoist takeover of mainland China. Subsequently, the IPR, with Owen Lattimore and company migrated, at your expense, to the University of British Columbia.” 3

While Commander Carr thinks Ronning “infiltrated” “Mr. Pearson’s” External Affairs Department, it is much more likely that he, like Pearson — himself a Soviet mole — was smuggled in. (Pearson, too, must have been smuggled in, because the F.B.I., in 1951, notified Canada’s RCMP that Pearson was a Red Agent.) Watkins, Ronning and other fellow Reds, including Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Jean Marchand and Gérard Pelletier were not simply “infiltrated” into Canada’s federal government, they were ushered in through the “Open Gates of Troy,” as well known documentary researcher and film maker G. Edward Griffin has called it, in his eye-opening two-part series, “The Subversion Factor” (on the Media tab).

Pearson moreover, while prime minister, stacked his famous Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism with still more elements of the left, including Soviet agent Jean-Louis Gagnon, a protégé of both future Trilateralist Mitchel Sharp and pilgrim of Moscow, Pierre Elliott Trudeau, the latter who led a Communist delegation at Moscow in April of 1952, organized and all expenses paid by the Canadian Communist Party.

Which begs the question, what were the Reds really up to on that Royal Commission? (In fact, I have a very good inkling, and I will deal with it in another post.)

READ my exclusive English translation of a segment from the Nemnis’ 2011 biography of Pierre Elliott Trudeau, which I have entitled “Trudeau, Communism, and the Privy Council Office of Canada (circa 1950)
 

______

1 Trudeau, Fils du Québec, père du Canada, Tome 2: La formation d’un homme d’Etat: 1944-1965  [Translation: Trudeau, Son of Quebec, Father of Canada, Volume 2: The Training of a Statesman: 1944-1965]. ISBN 978-2-7619-3192-2.
 
2 Goldwater Sees Elitist Sentiments Threatening Liberties, 1979
 
3 After the I.P.R. folded in America and moved to British Columbia, no more seems to have been heard about the need to investigate it. Therefore, a potential channel for Kremlin control over part or all of Canada has been left operating for over sixty years to the present. A question comes to mind. Could the unmolested presence of the I.P.R. in British Columbia have anything to do with the fact that in 1980, the United Nations apparently expected not only Quebec to “secede” by referendum, but also British Columbia? Both Quebec and B.C. were singled out for special notice a few months before the 1980 Quebec “secession” vote. At paragraph 159 of a document labeled CCPR A/35/40 (1980), the Committee of the “UN Human Rights Treaty System” of the United Nations, which deals with “secession,” declared in its “concluding observations” that:

Commenting on article 1 of the Covenant, some members noted that the right to self-determination was not expressly guaranteed in any of the Canadian provinces and that it was not even mentioned in the laws of British Columbia and Quebec.

“Self-determination” is a concept of international law expressed in the Charter of the United Nations and other international instruments, involving the right of “all peoples” to “secede” from a parent state under certain conditions. Moreover, “self-determination,” constitutionally, cannot be “mentioned” in any measure by any Province of Canada, because the power to “secede” is expressly denied by elimination of all risk of residual (national) sovereignty from the provincial sphere in 1867 using enumerated powers (powers confined to a list), thus prohibiting any provincial activity “in relation to” (legal phrase) “secession”.

Was the Communist U.N. expecting B.C. to “secede” in 1980, if Quebec registered a “Yes” and declared U.D.I.?

The Province of British Columbia has a “secession” movement called “B.C. Refed”. Moreover, in 2010, we learn that B.C. Premier, Gordon Campbell, attended the pro-Communist Bilderberg, which sources note is tightly entwined with the C.I.I.A. whose “evil granddaddy” is in fact the Kremlin-controlled I.P.R. which moved to British Columbia. Campbell’s conflict of interest commissioner, Paul Fraser, asserted that Campbell’s use of taxpayers’ moneys to attend the summer 2010 Bilderberg in Spain was not a conflict of interest, because he attended the secretive confab “as” the Premier. (“CBC News – British Columbia – Campbell’s Bilderberg trip no conflict: official,” according to CBC.ca online, Last Updated: Wednesday, December 15, 2010, 12:24 PM PT.)

And in 2005, as we can see at page 11 of their English-language program, the “Prestige Sponsors” of the newly hatched North American Forum on Integration (NAFI), include the Province of British Columbia, the other “Prestige Sponsors” being federal government departments of Canada, the United States Embassy (of all things!), the unconstitutional “International Relations” Ministry of the Province of Quebec, the Bloc Québécois (federal counterpart of the veiled Communist Parti Québécois in Quebec), the Forum of Federations, and the IDRC-CDRI (See: Triumvirat — The first interparliamentary simulation of North America (May 23 to 27, 2005, Canadian Senate, Ottawa, Canada).
 
The NAFI is a criminally seditious movement to federalize North America, involving the destruction of all three Constitutions, to eliminate Canada, the USA and Mexico, extinguishing the true fundamental right to self-determination of every Province of Canada under its lawful Constitution of 1867.

Other sponsors include universities; “Privileged Sponsors” are listed specifically: GazMetro, North American Fund for Environmental Cooperation, Bureau du premier ministre du Québec (office of the Quebec premier), The Washington Center. So, Quebec and B.C. are specifically targeted by our embedded Reds.
 
Thus, at the 2005 launch of the model parliament for (a Leninist-style regional) North America, the two provincial governments sponsoring the model parliament for the new Red entity were those of Quebec and British Columbia.
 

 

“Singing tomorrows?” or “Grinding tomorrows?” The Soviet Union is not yet Dead (Quebec, 1996)

“The pragmatic basis for a revised US response to ‘perestroika’ is the need to protect and preserve the American system from ‘restructuring’ preparatory to ‘convergence’ with the ‘reformed’ Soviet system, and to save the American people from the blood baths and re-education camps which such ‘conver­gence’ will eventually bring about, of which the West currently has no conception.”

— Anatoliy Golitsyn, writing in his “Post-script, the long-range deception strategy”, in The Perestroika DeceptionThe World’s Slide Towards the Second October Revolution (1995), p. 209

 
I have just found a document from 1996, the title of which strongly suggests that the 1995 Quebec referendum to “secede” (i.e., force all of Canada to “negotiate” a regional union) just missed the Soviet boat.

I’ve written this article in the order in which known information came to mind, topped off with the final research toward the end, which confirmed my intuition.

Had there really been a Cold War …

had there really been a post -Cold War …

had the Soviet Union indeed “collapsed” …

were Perestroika and democratisation of the USSR genuine …

then why would the Quebec Left in 1996 associate the very object of the 1995 Quebec referendum to “secede” with an ultimate triumph of the old Soviet Union?

I think the Left slipped up in a major way when certain exponents of it conferred a particular book title on a collection of essays on the 1995 Quebec referendum.

That book title inadvertently exposed the fact that Quebec’s referendums to “secede”, led by the veiled Communist Parti Québécois, are a Soviet tactic for restructuring Canada and North America.

The Soviet Union therefore necessarily did not “collapse”.

KGB defector, Anatoliy Golitsyn, in his 1995 book The Perestroika Deception, points out that the USSR undertook a superficial or “cosmetic” transformation to facilitate its own “convergence” with a “restructured” West.

After years of historical and constitutional research, it is my view that the Quebec referendums are undoubtedly one tool of that restructuring.

Middle-class French-Canadians unknowingly wave North American Union banners during 1995 Quebec “secession” rally.

Middle-class French-Canadians unknowingly wave North American Union banners during 1995 Quebec “secession” rally.

Moreover, as basic investigation will indicate — from the 1964 video footage of Communist Lévesque sweeping his arm across a map of Canada calling for its “profound” “restructuring”, to the questions on the 1980 and 1995 referendum ballots — the real goal is not for Quebec to become “sovereign”.

The goal is for Quebec to use a threat of dismantling Canada by secession, to force the “rest of Canada” to negotiate its complete restructuring to match whatever then-current stage of development is found in the European region.

In 1980, that stage was the European Economic Community (EEC). In 1995, it was the European Union (EU). Whatever the stage, for the clear purpose of deception, the desired restructuring is always called: “Canadian unity“.

René Lévesque, in English-language video footage, declares that the powers gained by Quebec in “seceding” will eventually be relinquished to unidentified recipients. These can only be regional authorities, municipal authorities and world government in a world state where nations have ceased to exist, and only cities and regions are on the signposts.

The title of the 1996 anthology in which Communists lament the 1995 Quebec Referendum loss is this:

Le goût du Québec.
L’après référendum 1995.
Des lendemains qui grincent…
ou qui chantent?

The title translates as follows:

The Taste of Quebec.
After the 1995 Referendum.
Singing tomorrows…
or grinding tomorrows?

The book (hereafter, “Lendemains“) (published at Montreal in 1996 by Les Éditions Hurtubise HMH, ltée, 260 pages) is divided into two sections of articles, one under the title “Des lendemains qui grincent…” (Grinding tomorrows?) and the other under the title: “Des lendemains qui chantent?” (Singing tomorrows?)

Le goût du Québec. L’après référendum 1995. Des lendemains qui grincent… ou qui chantent?

Le goût du Québec. L’après référendum 1995. Des lendemains qui grincent… ou qui chantent?


The part entitled “Des lendemains qui grincent” (“Grinding tomorrows”), has been written under a single name, the pseudonym “Jean du Pays“. “Jean du Pays” is a French pun on the title of a famous French-Canadian patriotic song, “Gens du pays” by Gilles Vigneault with music co-written by Gaston Rochon, and first performed by Vigneault on June 24, 1975.

In contrast to “Des lendemains qui grincent“, we have a cluster of authors unified under the necessarily (as we shall see) militant Red theme of “Singing tomorrows” — “Des lendemains qui chantent“, the ultimate triumph of the apparently not really reformed Soviet Union.

We have Myra Cree, Henry Mintzberg, Julien Bauer, Peter G. White, Claude Corbo, René Boudreault, Marco Micone, James O’Reilly, Robin Philpot, Bernard Cleary, Joseph Rabinovitch, Louis Cornellier, Isabelle Guinard, and Naïm Kattan, with Philippe Resnick in annex and labor commissioner, Marc Brière (aka the class-conscious Marxist “judge”) doing a post-script. A veritable “multicultural” plea for a new, essentially “territorial” common “nation” and new “people-hood” in order to re-engineer the vote next  time for the desired outcome.

The expression, “singing tomorrows” is a well known paean to the eventual triumph of the Soviet Union, as will be more clear further below.

The editor of the volume, an anthology published in 1996, is Marc Brière. Brière, born in 1929, calls himself an “Attorney, judge and Québécois essayist” (“Avocat, juge et essayiste québécois). (He is actually not a judge, but a commissioner of an administrative board. Who says Marxists are not class-conscious?)

Brière, who claims credit for the idea of the post-referendum anthology, calls himself a “member of Cité Libre“, the magazine founded by card-carrying Communist Gérard Pelletier and his pro-Soviet friend Pierre Elliott Trudeau. (“Lendemains” p. 257) Here is the full statement:

FRENCH ORIGINAL:

ENGLISH TRANSLATION:

Ancien élève du collège Stanislas de Montréal, il [Brière] passa deux ans à l’école navale de Royal Roads, en Colombie britannique, et devint officier de la Marine Royale du Canada, pour entreprendre ensuite des études de droit aux universités de Montréal et de Paris. Membre de Cité libre et de la Fédération libérale du Québec, il participa activement à la Révolution tranquille aux côtés de Paul Gérin-Lajoie et de René Lévesque. Il contribua à la fondation du Mouvement souveraineté-association, en 1967, puis à celle du Parti québécois. Robert Bourassa le nomma au Tribunal du travail en 1975.

A former student of Stanislas College in Montreal, he [Brière] spent two years at the Royal Roads naval college in British Columbia, and became a Royal naval officer of Canada, to then take up the study of law at the universities of Montreal and Paris. A member of Cité libre and the Liberal Federation of Quebec, he took an active part in the Quiet Revolution at the side of Paul Gérin-Lajoie and René Lévesque. He contributed to the founding of the Mouvement souveraineté-association in 1967, and to that of the Parti Québécois. Robert Bourassa appointed him to the Labor Board in 1975.

So, Brière has a personal interest and investment to vindicate in this book. He is a founding member of the MSA which was organized to become the veiled Communist PQ. He is a “member” of Cité libre  run by and for the goals of Communists in Canada. He is thus close to secret committee men from Cité libre who ordered the Parti Québécois  to be set up in the first place. He helped to set it up by contributing to the founding of the MSA which led to it. Brière then worked for the Parti Québécois  for four years “in government”. Brière is thus an insider. His 1996 book is necessarily a Communist tactic. He even got himself a little military training at the expense of Canada; and so he was possibly in a command chain at the time of the 1995 referendum. The implications of his book’s title, discussed below, should be taken seriously.

Alan Stang in “CANADA” (April 1971) identified Cité Libre as harboring Communists. Robert Rumilly (The Leftist Infiltration in French Canada, 1956 / L’Infiltration Gau­chiste au Canada Français) identified Cité Libre as the self-described “little sister” of Esprit, a crypto-Communist magazine in France founded in October 1931. Esprit’s  first issue featured a favorable travel journal of a voyage behind the Iron Curtain.

We later find the principal figures of Esprit linked to UNESCO at the founding of the UN. You can search the UNESCO web site today for the names of Emmanuel Mounier and Jacques Maritaine, both leading lights of the crypto-Communist Esprit.

(For stunning information on the Communist nature of the UN’s origins, G. Edward Griffin has narrated a superb exposé entitled The Subversion Factor. It is absolutely essential viewing. If you have never looked into Communism, this is the one film you must see. If you are familiar with Communism but haven’t seen it, you need to see it.)

With Marc Brière, we are thus firmly on territory of the far left associated by “former” Marxist-Leninist leader, Jean-François Lisée,* with Power Corporation of Canada, whose “secret committee” of Communist-infested “Liberals” in the federal cabinet of Soviet agent and (de facto) prime minister, Lester Bowles (aka “Mike”) Pearson, appointed René Lévesque to set up the “separatist” Parti Québécois and the referendums.

However, the Parti Québécois is a veiled Communist party, according to the terms of its own 1972 manifesto, which proposed a totalitarian government to run the economy, centralized production, the virtual obliteration of private business, and a self-managed work-force, all on the model of what Charles Perrault, then of the Conseil du patronat (Quebec Employers Council) and Narciso Pizarro, a Marxist socialist, both identified as the kind found in “socialist countries” such as Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia and Poland.

Given the title of this 1996 post-referendum book of Brière’s, “Singing tomorrows”, one may reasonably infer that not only has the purpose of the Parti Québécois not changed since 1972, but in some as yet unknown way, it is a direct creation of the Soviet agenda for the overthrow of North America. In a future post, I will explain the links discovered between international covert intelligence operations, the “secret committee” of Power Corporation, UNESCO, the creation of the Parti Québécois, and North American Union.

All this merely underscores the interpretation to be made of the book’s French title, explained in detail below, as implying that the failure of the 1995 referendum narrowly averted a Soviet overthrow of Canada.

Thus, the clear allusion in the title, in effect the banner under which the small host of writers has come to collaborate, is that the failure of the 1995 Quebec referendum was a near-miss to a Soviet takeover.

Moreover, the authors are writing in 1995-1996, well past the alleged “collapse of the Soviet Union” at the hands of Mr. Glasnost, or Mr. Perestroika, as you will, Mikhail Gorbachev.

“Collapse” Backup @ Calameo: http://en.calameo.com/read/00011179071a3fc0eb0c5

Keep in mind the name of KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn and his important books, New Lies for Old and The Perestroika Deception, in which Golitsyn only feigned “collapse” as a tactic in its “long-term strategy”.

Anatoliy Golitsyn was born in the Ukraine in 1926. He became a member of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union at the age of nineteen, when he also joined the KGB. In 1959, he graduated with a law degree from a four-year course at the KGB Institute in Moscow. He “graduated from the Moscow School of Military Counter-espionage, the counterintelligence faculty of the High Intelligence School, and the University of Marxism-Leninism” according to his profile in the foreword to his 1995 book (paperback 1997), The Perestroika Deception.

From 1959 to 1960, Golitsyn served as a senior analyst in the NATO section of the Information Department of the Soviet intelligence service. He repeatedly served in Vienna and Helsinki on counterintelligence assignments.

He defected to the USA in (1961??)

According to the late Christopher Story, who edited The Perestroika Deception, the book

“reveals how the largely unseen Soviet collective lead­ership, borrowing the mind-control ideas of Gramsci, implemented their long-pre­pared shift from Lenin’s ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ to his ‘state of the whole people’, the primary characteristic of which is a theatrical display of ‘democratism’ designed to convince the West that a decisive ‘Break with the Past has taken place, in order to encourage Western Governments to abandon caution and to embark upon an open-ended programme of collaboration with the ‘former’ Soviet Bloc.”

In the chapter entitled, “The Fourth Key: Lenin’s ‘Forging of New and Old Forms’ for Developing Socialism, and Chicherin’s idea of False Representative Institutions through the Admission of Non-Communists (p. 86), Golitsyn writes:

One key to understanding this basis lies in Lenin’s advice to Communist Parties ‘to study, to search for, to find and to grasp the one particular powerful, specifically national tactic which will solve our international task… until the final victory of Communism’. All parties, advised Lenin, must rid themselves of the radical phrase­ology of the Left Wing. They must be ready to use a variety of tactics, old and new, legal and illegal. ‘International Communism’, he went on, ‘must subordinate to itself not only new, but old forms too — not simply to reconcile the new with the old, but to forge all forms, new and old, into a single weapon which will bring full, complete and decisive victory for Communism’. Following Lenin’s advice, the Soviet strat­egists and Arbatov’s Institute for the Study of the USA and Canada have studied Western democracy, its political processes and its media. …

“It is also likely”, Golitsyn says:

“that prominent agents of influence in the West with knowl­edge of American conditions will have suggested that, to conquer the United States, Communism would have to be Americanised and dressed in ‘democratic’ garb.”

Given the title of Marc Brière’s 1996 socialist lament for the failure of the 1995 Quebec referendum (no “singing tomorrows”), then mutatis mutandis, I would ask, is Arbatov’s Institute for the Study of the USA and Canada involved in “Canadianising” Communism and dressing it up in the ‘democratic garb’ of Quebec referendums under the Communist-infested Parti Québécois which is a “false representative institution”? The referendums to “secede” (translation: to force the rest of Canada to “negotiate” the new regional system unfolding in Europe) are not only unconstitutional, they are forbidden by it.

I can explain this quickly in a way that Americans in particular will understand, because they understand the political and legal purposes of their own constitutional division of powers. I am referring to the distribution of legislative and political power between the federal and State levels. In America, the central or federal government has “enumerated” powers, a legal term meaning that its hands are tied; it can do only those things on the list of powers that constitutionally it is given to do.

In Canada, the reverse is true. The “state” or provincial powers are enumerated, with a small “general” or “residual” power confined to “local purposes” only. (See Section 92 of the British North America Act, 1867 — still the only lawful Constitution for Canada.)

As a result of this Canadian division of powers, a province literally has no power to take any steps outside the list, including holding referendums to “secede”; or drafting “laws” with preambles containing a unilateral declaration of independence, etc. There is no power on the list under which it can be done.

The Canadian division of powers was designed specifically to prevent them doing it. A province has no power to “secede”, and therefore no power to take a step in that direction, intended to facilitate “seceding”.

The 1998 opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada pretending the constitution (the current one, part of a coup d’etat imposed by Trudeau in 1982, with much of the language of the 1867 original) is “silent on the ability of a province to secede”. They lied. They ignored the division of powers deliberately, as well as every other feature designed to deny a provincial power to secede, or a federal power to annex Canada… to the USA or (ejusdem generis rule) into a regional union.

Therefore, since the time of the secret committee of Power Corporation (circa 1967), the referendums to “secede” — recommended by Trudeau and his Communist friends to René Lévesque — are entirely outside the lawful Constitution. They are unconstitutional and void. This is more clear from the words of the Hon. Justice John Wellington Gwynne of the Supreme Court of Canada (in better days), writing in Citizens’ and The Queen Insurance Cos. v. Parsons, (1880), 4 S.C.R. 215, pp. 347-348:

“To enjoy the supremacy so conferred by the B.N.A Act, these local legislatures must be careful to confine the assumption of exercise of the powers so conferred upon them, to the particular subjects expressly placed under their jurisdiction […]”

“True it may be, that the Acts of the local legislatures affecting the particularly enumerated subjects placed by the B.N.A. Act under their exclusive control, if not disallowed by the Dominion Government, are supreme in the sense that they cannot be called in question in any court, but this supremacy is attributable solely to the authority of the B.N.A. Act, which has placed those subjects under the exclusive control of the local legislatures, and is not, in any respect, enjoyed as an incident to national sovereignty.”

There is no power in the lawful Constitution for a Province to “secede” or to do anything “in relation to” (legal term) seceding. The provincial powers reserved to a Province in Canada are enumerated, i.e., confined to the list of constitutional subject matters. A Province can do nothing that is “in relation to” “secession”, which includes conducting referendums “in relation to” “seceding”.

Gilles Duceppe (“former” Marxist-Leninist-Maoist) of the veiled Communist Bloc Québécois (at the federal level) has suggested that Quebec has a parliamentary “privilege” to conduct the referendums and to ask the public any question it pleases. This is untrue. Parliamentary privilege is confined to the exercise of existing legal powers essential to the conduct by the Legislature of its affairs as such a Legislature. There is no “parliamentary privilege” to act as a putsch, or in any way outside the existing legal powers of a Province. Privilege ceases to exist when the Legislature clearly shows by deliberate unconstitutional behavior that it is not acting as a Legislature, but as the perpetrator of a coup: i.e., as a usurper.

Further, Provincial powers are confined to their local territory. No Province can take any action which substantially affects any other Province or all of Canada. In other words, a Province has no such “extra-territorial” power. Therefore, referendums in Quebec as a pretext to “negotiate” the restructuring of all of Canada are fundamentally extra-territorial in character (legal term), and therefore unconstitutional.

Trudeau, a constitutional lawyer, and a law professor, knew that a Province has no power to “secede”. He thus used a ploy to conceal the illegality: he tabled a federal Bill  to conduct a Canada-wide referendum on “national unity”, while declaring that the referendum might be done instead only in Quebec (under his Communist friend, Lévesque). The federal Bill was never passed (which saved it from judicial review and thus from exposure as unlawful: — the federal government, also, has no constitutional power to dismantle Canada). But the public fell for it: the illegal Quebec referendums have proceeded since that time on a blind assumption derived from Trudeau’s unlawful public statement.

The entire operation is an exercise in mass mind-control, which depends in turn upon media control. The latter has been achieved, for example, through creation of the State-controlled CBC-Radio Canada which underpins the sedition, subversion and propaganda of the Left, wrongly conveying these to the public as normal events; while planting fifth-columnists (such as Rhodes Scholar Rex Murphy and Bilderberger Peter Mansbridge) in editorial news positions to help engineer public compliance with illegality until Canada is done and disposed of.

It can be no coincidence that Pearson retired suddenly while in office, the same year the secret committee decided to create the veiled Communist Parti Québécois  (PQ). Pearson’s retirement allowed Trudeau to rise from  that secret committee to the Prime Minister’s Office, precisely in time to seem to “fight” “Lévesque’s” new “separatist” party to “save” Canadian “unity” by “negotiating” the European system to replace Confederation. The very system Mikhail Gorbachev has called “the New European Soviet”.

The Parti Québécois  which is running these referendums therefore certainly fits the label of a “false representative institution”. The Soviet ploy for convergence thus obviously includes not only the creation of false (merely cosmetic) “democratic” agencies in Communist countries to encourage convergence, but the concocting of false “political” parties and other “dummy” entities in target countries to guide their dismantling, ostensibly by their own citizens under the guise of “democratic” procedure.

Now, let me get back to the sinister title of Brière’s 1996 anthology.

I am reading that anthology now. So far, its appearance immediately after the failed 1995 referendum seems to be an aggressive tactic to keep the “secession” ball in the air.

However, I will not discuss the various articles in the book right now. I will stick to the title of the book, which is fundamental. In particular since it also serves to divide the book into two sections, “Singing tomorrows” (implied Soviet victory) and “Grinding tomorrows” (misery until the day of victory).

I would not have recognized the allusion to ultimate Soviet victory in the title of the 1996 book on the 1995 Quebec referendum, but for Alan Stang.

Jean-Louis Gagnon at the Microphone

Jean-Louis Gagnon at the Microphone

The 1971 offprint by American Opinion of Stang’s CANADA How The Communists Took Control features a reproduction at p. 14 of a telegram sent by a known Soviet agent (exposed by Igor Gouzenko): one Jean-Louis Gagnon. Gagnon used the expression “singing tomorrows” in connection with an eventual triumph of “the great Soviet Union”.

Remarking on Gouzenko’s naming of Gagnon (among many other agents in Canada for Soviet espionage), Alan Stang says:

“The papers brought by Igor Gouzenko to the Canadians from the Soviet Embassy in Ottawa revealed that it was Jean-Louis Gagnon who had supplied Soviet Colonel Zabotin with the information that the exact date of D-Day was June 6, 1944.”

D-Day was the date of the Allied landing in France, in World War II.

To enhance that picture, anticommunist author Eric D. Butler (an Australian) wrote as follows in his important article “The Real Communist Menace”:

“Colonel Zabotin, for whom Gouzenko worked, and who figures prominently in the [Canadian] Commissioner’s Report, suddenly departed from Ottawa in December, 1945, without notifying the Canadian authorities, to whom he was accredited. He sailed from New York in a Soviet ship which left secretly at night without complying with port regulations. Just after the publication of the Canadian Report, a newspaper item said that Colonel Zabotin “died from heart failure four days after his return to Russia from Canada.”

Source url: http://en.calameo.com/books/00011179074d7854a29cc
The Real Communist Menace

In his 1982 article, “Inside the ‘Featherbed File’? Canada’s Watergate — The story of treason in Ottawa”, former RCMP undercover agent, Patrick Walsh, further describes the fact that Jean-Louis Gagnon was a member of Soviet spy rings operating in Canada exposed by Igor Gouzenko:

“The almost incredible story of Soviet penetration into the Canadian civil service has never been written, with the exception of the Gouzenko expose of the ’40s which uncovered one branch of Soviet spying: the GRU military intelligence network masterminded by Col. Zabotin. However, 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.”

Mitchell Sharp deserves further mention. Sharp — who helped to protect the Soviet infiltration of Canada that Gouzenko had begun to expose — would become a future Trudeau advisor, and a future member of David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission.

Sharp is seen here whispering in Trudeau’s ear at the Liberal convention which elects Trudeau as de facto Prime Minister (Alan Stang has generally described this event in his chapter “The Big Switch”).

Mitchell Sharp whispering in the ear of Pierre Elliott Trudeau at the 1967 Liberal Leadership Convention

Mitchell Sharp whispering in the ear of Pierre Elliott Trudeau at the 1967 Liberal Leadership Convention

The Rockefellers’ Chase Manhattan was among those banks (Kuehn Loeb of the Warburgs was another) which deliberately and consciously financed the 1917 Bolshevik revolution.

That so-called “revolution” was in fact the aggressive invasion of Russia by radical Communists. The so-called “revolution” resulted in the deaths of tens of millions of innocents, mostly Christian Russians. It created the most brutal tyranny the world has ever seen, whose butchers have never been brought to justice despite the alleged “fall” of the now “former” Soviet Union.

Mitchell Sharp is thus an associate of these same Rockefellers and their Trilateral Commission, whose literature, by the way, includes an article by Peter Sutherland in which he extols the French crypto-communists of Esprit as “Catholic socialists”. The mire expands. Esprit is linked to Trudeau’s Cité libre, to UNESCO (arm of the UNO as world government), and to the Trilateral Commission.)

After a “cooling off” period, Jean-Louis Gagnon returned from Brazil only to be employed by the federal government of Canada! Most notably, he found protection with “pilgrim of Moscow” Pierre Elliott Trudeau, as Quebec historian Rumilly calls him.

Stang points out that Gagnon’s telegram, sent from Washington to a Communist May-day rally in Montreal on May 1st, 1946 conveys the adoration of Gagnon for “the great Soviet Union”.

Here is the English translation published by Alan Stang along with the French telegram in the John Birch Society’s offprint of Stang’s April 1st, 1971 “CANADA” article in American Opinion:

“On this first post-war victorious May Day we
can foresee the victory of the working
class STOP Fraternal greetings to all trade
union leaders STOP Let us go forward to Peace STOP
Long live the glorious Soviet Union STOP Long live
singing tomorrows
STOP”

Stang was not alone in publishing a copy of the telegram. In the same month of April, 1971, the journal Straight Talk! of the Edmund Burke Society (EBS) (based in Scarborough, Ontario), also featured an image of the telegram. Its unsigned article said that Jean-Louis Gagnon had been “a member of the Communist Party” at the time he sent the telegram to a Communist May Day rally.

Telegram sent by Soviet agent and Communist Party member Jean-Louis Gagnon to a Montreal Communist May-Day Rally on May 1st, 1946: “Singing Tomorrows” (“les lendemains qui chantent“), published in the April 1971 issue of Straight Talk!, journal of The Edmund Burke Society (EBS); and by the John Birch Society in the April 1971 article in American Opinion by Alan Stang entitled “CANADA How The Communists Took Control”.

 
Here is my transcript of the original French telegram:

“Ce premier mai victorieuse d’après-guerre laisse
prévoir l’avènement de la victoire [de la] classe
ouvrière STOP Saluts fraternels aux chefs
unionistes STOP En avant pour la paix STOP Vive
la grande Union soviétique STOP Vive les
lendemains qui chantent
STOP.”

 

Militant Communist origin of the term
les lendemains qui chantent“.

The phrase “les lendemains qui chantent” originates in a 1937 “song of the Left” entitled “Jeunesse” (Youth) with lyrics by Paul Vaillant-Couturier, and music by Arthur Honegger. It appears, in the singular, in the last line of the first six-line stanza of the song, which celebrates the history of Communism while anticipating its ultimate triumph. That ultimate triumph is embodied in the last line of the first verse, which reads:

“Nous bâtirons un lendemain qui chante
(We will build a singing tomorrow)
 

Here’s the first stanza:

FRENCH ORIGINAL:

ENGLISH TRANSLATION:

JEUNESSE
Paroles de Paul Vaillant-Couturier
Musique d’Arthur Honegger – 1937

YOUTH
Lyrics by Paul Vaillant-Couturier
Music by Arthur Honegger – 1937

Nous sommes la jeunesse ardente
Qui vient escalader le ciel
Dans un cortège fraternel
Unissons nos mains frémissantes
Sachons protéger notre pain
Nous bâtirons un lendemain qui chante

We are the passionate youth
Who come to scale the heights
In fraternal procession
Unite our trembling hands
We know the way to defend our bread
We will build a singing tomorrow

Source: “Les chansons de GaucheCentenaire du Parti socialiste (1905-2005)

Backup @ Calameo: http://en.calameo.com/read/00011179026db4b7638cd

The explanation provided in the footer to the song at the web site of the Parti socialiste, in the section “Centenaire du Parti socialiste” (Centenary of the Socialist Party) describes the fifth and final stanza of the same song as an allusion to the Communist war-cry of the French Front. The French Front was the enlargement of the Front Populaire (Popular Front) to include Catholics and former members of the “Croix de Feu” (Cross of Fire).

The theme of “we will build a singing tomorrow” is taken up again by the militant Communist, Gabriel Péri, in his final letter, before being executed at Mount Valérien in December 1941: “je meurs pour des lendemains qui chantent” (“I die for singing tomorrows”).

Péri’s 59-page autobiographical letter was published posthumously in Paris in 1947 by Éditions sociales under the title, Les lendemains qui chantent. This was one year after Soviet agent Jean-Louis Gagnon’s May 1st telegram to the Communist May-Day rally in 1946.

However, the phrase was already current from Paul Vaillant-Couturier’s Communist battle hymn of 1937, Jeunesse.

See: SearchWorks catalog at Stanford University Libraries.
Les Lendemains qui chantent : autobiographie, Péri, Gabriel, 1902-1941. Paris : Éditions sociales, 1947.

Backup @ Calameo: http://en.calameo.com/read/00011179040bc00a0b84f

Paul Vaillant-Couturier (1892-1937) was a journalist, writer, member of the French parliament, and editor-in-Chief of the Communist review, l’Humanité.
 

Conclusion:

To sum up, the very title of this 1996 anthology — “Le goût du Québec. L’après référendum 1995. Des lendemains qui grincent… ou qui chantent?” — by a raft of socialists lamenting the 1995 Quebec referendum loss, appears to imply that the Left expected a Soviet conquest of Canada in 1995 by means of the ballot box.

International state recognition of Quebec and the other dismantled Provinces would have conferred a “treaty power” so that all might sign “treaties of accession to the European system”. A system that Mikhail Gorbachev has called “the new European Soviet”.

The phrase “les lendemains qui chantent” in the title of the 1996 book therefore suggests that Jean-Louis Gagnon’s “great Soviet Union” indeed has not collapsed: the Quebec referendums are a “specifically national tactic” — a part of its “Long Term Strategy” for complete Communist conquest.

Anatoliy Golitsyn warned in his books New Lies For Old, and The Perestroika Deception, that the Soviet Union did not collapse. It went “underground” in execution of a long-range strategy of “convergence” with and “restructuring” of Western countries.

The Quebec referendums under the Parti Québécois in 1980 and in 1995 were attempts to fundamentally restructure all of Canada for Communism. The referendums (for both political dismantling and horizontal east-west restructuring on the heels of socialist policies), are interspersed with “trade deals” for vertical north-south integration, restructuring and convergence.

The so-called “trade deals” are a pretext for the vertical integration of Canada, USA and Mexico into a Communist regional union.

So far, the power centers of the existing nation-state framework — although controlled from without — remain within their original countries. It is absolutely essential to recover constitutional control of these power centers — our national governments — before they are used to dismantle us. It may or may not be possible to do this politically; but it must be done, legally.

It is vital to launch constitutional challenges to unconstitutional action and to hammer our respective rogue governments with a torrent of constitutional lawsuits. The people must not be presumed to accept or to obey our unconstitutional regimes. Above all, we must not allow ourselves to be manipulated into cooperating or even seeming to cooperate with our nations’ demise. The international community views non-revolt as passive compliance.

A Final Closing Note

Looking over the list of writers who contributed to the 1996 anthology, most are not yet familiar to me. However, a couple stand out.

Peter G. White is President of the Canadian branch of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the world-government crowd, i.e., the Canadian Institute of International Affairs (CIIA) now called Canadian International Institute (CIC) and simply “Open Canada”. The CIC named billionaire Communism-promoter, George Soros, “Globalist of the Year” in 2010.

White is also Vice-president of the phony Council for Canadian Unity, which keeps the “secession” ball up in the air so Quebec can be used to dissolve what remains of the constitution of Canada for regional “union”, that being the real meaning of “unity”.

Also at the time of publishing the 1996 book, White is an associate of Conrad Black and is President and administrator of the Quebec branch of Black’s Hollinger Inc., which owns a slew of French-language Quebec daily newspapers, including Le Droit in Ottawa-Hull. Le Droit is known to have been involved in manipulating political affairs in Ontario linked to the 1998 Supreme Court of Canada “Quebec secession” Reference. (Well, it’s known to me, anyway, in addition to being known to the “secession” conspirators; I’ve done my homework. The case in question is Lalonde v. Ontario (Commission de restructuration des services de santé), 2001 CanLII 21164 (ON C.A.) [56 O.R. (3d) 577].

In addition, White was sitting on the Boards of Directors of Téléglobe, Télésystème Inc., and Southam Inc., all bastions of communications and media control. Through the CIIA and Southam, White is therefore linked to Power Corporation of Canada, which sits on the Board and Senate of the CIIA (world government), and which purchased the money-losing Southam chain of newspapers in 1994. Power Corp. thus acquired control of Quebec’s one and only English-language daily newspaper, The Montreal Gazette, the year before the 1995 Quebec referendum subject of the 1996 anthology.

Power Corp. appointed a new publisher, Michael Goldbloom to run The Gazette. Goldbloom, along with other Gazette figures including Editor, Sheila Fraser, published signed editorials urging English-speaking Canadians in Quebec to vote “Yes” in the upcoming 1995 referendum. Fraser was later appointed to Canada’s Senate where she led a Senate committee to unlawfully adopt the 1998 Secession opinion of the non-judicial advisory board of the Supreme Court of Canada as the so-called “Clarity Act”, a federal “law” purporting to authorize Quebec “secession”.

White moreover was principal Secretary to Prime Minister Brian Mulroney (Mr. NAFTA, i.e. Mr. Continental Union) from 1983 to 1986. From 1986 to 1988 White was chairman of Domgroup Ltd. and editor of Saturday Night Magazine: more media control.

White is linked to Maurice Sauvé, who sat on the secret committee of socialist-infested “Liberals” at Power Corporation of Canada. That secret committee of mostly Ministers from Quebec in the federal cabinet of Soviet agent Lester Bowles Pearson instructed Communist René Lévesque to create and lead the Parti Québécois (PQ) in 1967. The PQ ran both Quebec referendums to “secede” in 1995 and 1980. The PQ’s political manifesto is Communist; that’s the one I’ve been translating. Look for it in the sidebar: Quand nous serons vraiment chez nous.

Charles Taylor is a Rhodes Scholar with a PhD in philosophy from Oxford; and is President of the Quebec Section of the New Democratic Party (NDP), as well as leftist “guru” to the late Jack Layton, the former leader of Canada’s federal NDP, which is a full member of the Socialist International (SI) and signed up to world government. The NDP’s party constitution intends to abolish private property.

In the back of the 1996 anthology, Taylor is declared to be a “world recognized authority”, having published, amongst others, Explanation of Behaviour  (1964), Pattern of Politics  (1970), Hegel  (1975), Hegel and Modern Society  (1979), Philosophical Papers  (1985), Sources of the Self  (1989), and The Malaise of Modernity  (1991). Taylor is a member of the Royal Society of Canada and of the British Academy. As a Rhodes Scholar, he himself is undoubtedly one of the chief causes of the “malaise of modernity”.

Charles Taylor is perhaps best known in Quebec for his cheer-leading of the French Canadians in an attempt to destroy their racial and cultural homogeneity through a process of endless “reasonable accommodation” of the 200+ cultures of incoming mass-immigrated foreign races imported for the purpose of anti-national unconstitutional “multiculturalism”…. apparently the intended format of the upcoming multicultural regional North American Union.

______
* Lisée is counted among “former” “(translation:) leaders of Marxist-Leninist organizations in the 1970s, who joined the upper spheres of the bourgeois political class after having atoned for their “crimes” and expressed their repentance”. That quote is from issue No. 71 (20-11-2005) of the Drapeau Rouge Express (Red Flag Express), the online journal of the Parti Communiste Revolutionnaire (Revolutionary Communist Party). Also see the book: Ils voulaient changer le monde. Le militantisme Marxiste-Léniniste au Québec (They wanted to change the world. Marxist-Leninist militancy in Quebec) by sociologist, Jean-Philippe Warren. Lisée himself addresses the history in that book during a radio broadcast by the French-language CBC (Radio-Canada) entitled “Le marxisme-léninisme, une utopie?” aired on Monday, October 22nd, 2007. The thing is, Lisée is not a “former” Marxist-Leninist. He’s doing the regional union now, under protection of the so-called “bourgeoisie”, the super-capitalists. Lisée crafted the strategy for the 1995 Quebec referendum and wrote the question on the ballot.

In a review of the Warren book at http://www.revueargument.ca (Vol. 11, No. 1, Autumn 08 — Winter 09), both Lisée and Gilles Duceppe are introduced as coming from the “extreme left”: “… But as long as one is satisfied to grasp the adventure of the extreme-left by its most delirious and most disastrous end […] one will not be able to understand the reasons which led a number of educated and politicized young people — today occupying eminent positions in the media, the universities and the political parties (Jean-François Lisée, Gilles Duceppe, Robert Comeau, Alain Saulnier) — to give body and soul to the construction of a communist society from coast to coast.”

We are supposed to believe that these “former” Marxist-Leninists “repented” of their “crimes” and joined the “Establishment” in politics. I think that is as much of a myth as the Cold War and the fall of Communism. These men are conducting their revolution, right now, under protection of the so-called “bourgeoisie”, the bankers and the supercapitalists, without whose money the first Bolshevik Revolution could not have been done.

The Communist revolution is underway. They are replacing our populations with mass immigration, they are changing the form of government, eliminating international borders, they are forming the regional unions. Everything they are doing now in Establishment “politics” is what the Marxist-Leninists always wanted to do. Could it be that the Establishment has fooled the Marxist-Leninists? Or have the Marxist-Leninists fooled the Establishment?

Quebec: A North-American Communist Military Power Built by the Federal Government of Canada

For the United States, the independence of Quebec would be “much more serious than the Cuban missile crisis”

— Pierre Elliott Trudeau in Washington, February 1977, quoted in the Prologue to Jean-François Lisée’s 1991, Dans L’Oeil de l’Aigle, Washington Face au Québec (Boréal)

 

An emerging North-American Communist military power

An emerging North-American
Communist military power

If this is your first time here, the title of this post will only make sense once you read the 1972 manifesto of the Parti Québécois. That PQ document is entitled Quand nous serons vraiment chez nous, and calls for a Communist State of Quebec. See the sidebar.

Dorothy (“Dot” for short) Fuhrman of Kelowna, British Columbia, was 83 years old in 2008 when I found her web page, Canadian Military History, tracked her down and called her up.

Dorothy had collected news headlines for decades, documenting the transposition of Canada’s federal ordnance and military infrastructure into Quebec.

As well, Dorothy noted massive federal funding (from Canadian taxpayers) that went to Quebec-based corporations; while high-technology industries, including air and space technology were hijacked out of their provinces of origin and moved to Quebec.

In essence, Quebec deliberately has been built up to be a North American military power. This future sovereign titan would fall directly into the hands of the veiled Communist Parti Québécois (PQ), as a parting gift from the hands of the veiled Communist Liberals1 who set up the PQ so they could “fight” it in a referendum and lose.

The “loss” would allow the Marxists, Soviet moles and Fabian Socialists running the federal level to “negotiate” with the Marxists, Rhodes Scholars and Fabian Socialists running Quebec to impose the “New European Soviet” system on all of Canada, in the name of “national unity”.

I tried to explain to Dot that Quebec was being ramped up for North American Union; that it had to appear to “secede” as a pretext to reconstruct all of North America on the lines of the European system. Dot wasn’t buying it. The decades of propaganda setting up a new War of the Roses between the French and the English in Canada as a front for other subversive activities, had done a thorough job. Dot was convinced that Pierre Elliott Trudeau had been pro-French and anti-English, and had thus robbed “English Canada” for Quebec.

In fact, Trudeau was pro-Soviet, anti-freedom, and had robbed Canada to create a North American military power able to restructure the continent for his friends in Moscow.

“Yes!” and it becomes possible!

The North American Union logo of the 1995 Quebec referendum to “secede”.
«OUI!» et ça devient possible!
“Yes!” and it becomes possible!

Shortly after the 1995 referendum whose logo was a borderless North America, and whose slogan was “Yes, and it becomes possible“, news leaked out that a communiqué had been faxed to Canadian Armed Forces at home and abroad from the office of the Leader of the Official [federal] opposition, Lucien Bouchard, on October 26th, four days before the 1995 referendum.

The fax encouraged Canadian military personnel born in Quebec to defect to a new Quebec Army immediately after a “Yes”. The message even reached Canadian troops stationed in Bosnia.

Evidently, the “Yes” was expected in 1995 despite the fact that early opinion polls indicated Quebecers did not want another referendum. Even documentary film footage (I call it “docuganda”, a fusion of documentary technique with propaganda), refers to the Parti Québécois’s “reluctant troops”. The voting public was unwilling to be dragged to the polls yet again in a bid to destroy their country.

The seditious fax was discussed in Hansard; attested to by Diane Francis, a former American and Financial Post Editor (appointed 1991), in her newspaper columns and in a book she wrote. Francis received a copy of the fax from National Defense Minister, David Collenette.

The fax was quoted and its implications relied upon in 1996 by Harvard Lawyer and Congressman, Tom Campbell — described in some quarters as a “Red Cartelist” — as grounds for USA and Canada to forge supranational institutions (the joint institutions of a North American Union in embryo) to prevent North America from unraveling when Quebec “secedes”.

That was absolutely an attempt in 1996 by the Marxist CFR — of which Campbell and most or all of his hand-picked witnesses before the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee of Congress were members — to “deepen” NAFTA on the excuse of Quebec “secession”.

NAFTA is an annexation agreement, but without the common parliament and politburo of the European Union. This is clear among many reasons from the words of Gérald Tremblay, Mayor of Montreal, at the 2008 model parliament for North America hosted at Montreal City Hall by the North American Forum on Integration (NAFI). In his letter of welcome to the participating students, Tremblay says:

The City of Montreal is pleased to welcome university students from Canada, the United States and Mexico to the fourth edition of the Triumvirate, held by the North American Forum on Integration (NAFI). A vehicle for reflection and dialogue, this model parliament — which will take place in the council chamber at Montreal City Hall — is expected to help you better understand the issues surrounding the implementation of NAFTA.

The Mayor then went on to speak of the NAFI model parliament as symbolizing “an openness founded on the free exchange of ideas and on freedom of movement, transcending national and cultural borders.” He also, irrationally, praised the exercise of the model parliament as “democracy”. Christopher Story, editor of Anatoly Golitsyn’s (The Perestroika Deception) might better call it “democratism“, the illusion of democracy.

The national border shared by Canada and the USA has not yet been officially removed. The impetus in that direction, however, was provided by 9/11, as an excuse to throw a unifying military perimeter around the continent.

Therefore, one year after the failed attempt to dismantle North America for “Total NAFTA” by Quebec “secession”, and some five years before 9/11 on the pretext of which NAFTA has, in fact, been “deepened”, although still without core institutions, the CFR gave itself motive, and therefore made itself a “suspect” in the preparations and commission of the phony “terrorist” attacks of 9/11.

With respect again to the 1995 seditious fax, a Montreal lawyer attempted to bring criminal sedition charges against Lucien Bouchard and Jean-Marc Jacob, the federal Member from Charlesbourg, named and repeatedly quoted in the fax. The lawyer was slapped with a gag order by a Montreal judge.

The lawyer then switched jurisdictions and rushed to Federal Court in Ottawa, where that judge dismissed the case, declaring the fax to be a harmless “job offer”. When the lawyer tried to appeal, he was advised the courthouse taping apparatus had “malfunctioned”; and there was thus no record of his oral pleading.

Retired Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, Frank Iacobucci, who sat on the non-judicial advisory bench of the Supreme Court of Canada for the Quebec “Secession” Reference, confirmed the alleged “concern” (pretended concern) that in 1995, Canadian troops from Quebec might have defected after a “Yes”:

Retired Supreme Court of Canada Justice
Frank Iacobucci (Oct. 2013) on the “concern”
that Canadian troops might defect after
a “Yes” in the 1995 Quebec referendum.

 
In 1985, Mr. Iacobucci was appointed Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General for Canada; in 1988, he was made Chief Justice of the Federal Court of Canada; and in 1991, a Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. Together with his “brothers and sisters” on the non-judicial advisory bench, Mr. Iacobucci concocted a phony pretext to force Canada to “negotiate” its own dismantling after a Yes in a future Quebec referendum — the very dismantling necessary to complete NAFTA and the North American Union. In the video clip above, he’s in Boston, celebrating the accomplishment.

In that video, his voice trembling, Iacobucci — retired from several top jobs in “Justice” — is apparently clueless about the remedies for a threat of treason and sedition. Says he: “There were all sorts of rumors flying about… I don’t know whether they were true or not.”

Well, as they say: “See no evil, hear no evil,” and you don’t have to act upon it. The name of the game is treason, and how to pull it off under the noses of Canadians.

A complete copy of the seditious fax is hard to find. I have therefore compiled statements quoted from it by Diane Francis and Tom Campbell, and have translated where necessary:

Diane Francis, Maîtres Chanteurs Chez Nous ! Le Canada En Otage, Adaptation Française, Hélène Thibault

Translation:

Le titre du communiqué disait :

« Un Québec souverain aura besoin de tous les militaires québécois actuellement au sein des Forces armées canadiennes, estime M. Jean-Marc Jacob, député de Charlesbourg ».

Celui-ci est cité à plusieurs reprises dans le communiqué :

The title of the communiqué said:

“A sovereign Quebec will have need of all Québécois soldiers currently in the Canadian Armed forces, estimates Mr.Jean-Marc Jacob, Member for Charlesbourg”.

The latter is quoted several times in the communiqué:

« Évidemment, le Québec ne doit pas prétendre, à cause de contraintes financières, se doter d’une armée capable de protéger l’intégrité de son immense territoire. Il est utopique de penser maintenir ou créer une capacité militaire coûteuse (armée, marine, aviation) […]. Le Québec a besoin d’une force de défense, notamment pour surveiller et intervenir sur son territoire, participer à des alliances stratégiques internationales et à certaines missions de paix, en plus de répondre à tout besoin en matière de sécurité civile, comme dans le cas de sinistres naturels, de recherche ou de sauvetage.

“Obviously, due to financial constraints, Quebec cannot lay claim to an army able to protect the integrity of its immense territory. It is utopian to imagine maintaining or creating a costly military capability (army, navy, air force) […]. Quebec needs a defense force, in particular to control and intervene on its territory, to participate in international strategic alliances and in certain peace missions, as well as responding to needs for civil security, as in the case of natural disasters, search or rescue.

[…] Le député de Charlesbourg estime que pour mener à bien ces fonctions, le Québec aura besoin de tous les militaires actuels québécois. […] Au lendemain d’un vote pour le Oui, le Québec devra créer immédiatement un ministère de la Défense, un embryon d’état-major et offrir à tous les militaires québécois servant dans les Forces canadiennes la possibilité d’intégrer les Forces québécoises en conservant leurs grades, ancienneté, solde et fonds de retraite de façon à assurer une meilleure transition. »

[…] The Member for Charlesbourg estimates that to carry out these functions, Quebec will need all current Québécois soldiers. […] Shortly after a Yes vote, Quebec must immediately create a Ministry for Defense, an embryonic staff headquarters and offer to all Québécois soldiers serving in the Canadian Forces the possibility of joining the Québécois Forces while preserving their ranks, seniority, account balance, and pension funds in order to ensure a better transition.”

À propos de cette dernière phrase, la version anglaise disait « the day after a Yes win » ; mais, pour noyer le poisson, on a fait croire aux anglophones qui ne connaissaient pas les subtilités de la langue française que cette traduction était erronée et qu’il aurait fallu lire « some time after a Yes win »8. Sans ergoter davantage, mentionnons à cet égard que, si l’expression française « au lendemain de » comporte une ambiguïté, l’adverbe « immédiatement », lui, ne laisse place à aucune équivoque !

In connection with this last sentence, the English-language version said “the day after a Yes win”; but, to hook the fish, anglophones unfamiliar with the subtleties of the French language were led to believe that this translation was a mistake, and that it should have read “some time after a Yes win”. Without further ado, let us mention in that respect, that if the French expression “shortly after” involves an ambiguity, the adverb “immediately”, leaves no room for doubt!

Le communiqué disait que le Québec paie 23,5 % du budget militaire canadien, soit plus de 2,6 milliards de dollars par année. Il n’en coûterait pas plus cher au Québec après son accession à la souveraineté, et le nouvel État pourrait même économiser environ 700 millions de dollars, puisque

« le Québec n’aura plus à débourser pour les extravagances du Canada, qui achète beaucoup trop et pour trop cher. »

The communiqué said that Quebec pays 23.5% of the Canadian military budget, meaning over 2.6 billion dollars a year. It would not cost Quebec any more after its accession to sovereignty, and the new State could even save about 700 million dollars, since

“Quebec will no longer have to expend for the extravagances of Canada, which buys too much for which it pays too much.”

Le communiqué est astucieusement formulé, de façon à faire passer le message de Lucien Bouchard et du Bloc Québécois, sans pour autant que cet appel aux armes puisse être directement attribué à Bouchard lui-même. Le communiqué cite Jean-Marc Jacob qui, à son gré, a pu prendre ses distances des citations ou pinailler sur des détails insignifiants.

The communiqué is astutely formulated to transmit the message of Lucien Bouchard and the Bloc Québécois, without, however, attributing this call-to-arms to Bouchard, himself. The communiqué quotes Jean-Marc Jacob who can distance himself as he likes from the quotations, or focus on insignificant details.

September 25, 1996, Wednesday
Section: Capitol Hill Hearing Testimony
Headline: Testimony September 25, 1996

Tom Campbell Congressman House International Relations Western Hemisphere Situation In Quebec
Statement Of Congressman Tom Campbell
Before The Subcommittee On The Western Hemisphere
House International Relations Committee
The Issue Of Quebec Sovereignty

/ EXTRACT

Four days prior to the last referendum, a Member of Parliament of Canada’s Official Opposition party, the Bloc Quebecois, who was also then the Vice-Chairman of the Standing Committee on National Defence, faxed a Communique to Canadian bases in effect commanding Quebecois troops in the Canadian armed forces in the event of a Yes vote to “respect the people’s accession to sovereignty” and “transfer their loyalty to the new country whose security they will ensure.” He also stated unequivocally that “Quebec will be part of NATO.

Copyright 1996 FDCHeMedia, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

Federal Document Clearing House Congressional Testimony

The extracts of the seditious fax quoted by the CFR’s Harvard lawyer, Tom Campbell are far more explicit and direct than those referred to by Diane Francis. Why did Francis — who considers herself a member of “the Establishment” (having been invited aboard The Royal Britannia, for example), not take the bull by the horns as Campbell did, and quote the “command” to “transfer” allegiance? If, indeed, the fax was such a “command” to French-Canadian members of the Canadian armed forces to “transfer” their “loyalty” to a new “country” of Quebec, it was clearly not a mere “job offer“.

The Ottawa judge and the Montreal “gag” order apparently concealed a direct, federally-appproved defection from the Canadian Armed Forces in order to man the ordnance which the federal level systematically has transferred into Quebec for decades — as we shall presently see — to give the new future State an instant, and expensively equipped Armed Forces.

The communiqué alleging “budget constraints” for Quebec in setting up an independent military, must have been tongue-in-cheek. The included criticism that “Canada buys too much”, and “too expensively,” may in fact mean that “the extravagances of Canada,” in over-spending of its military budget, have been tailored to supply Quebec with a well equipped Armed Forces — at the expense of all Canadian taxpayers.

Diane Francis, in the same book quoted above, disclosed massive transfers of Canadian ordnance into Quebec in 1992:

Encore plus scandaleux fut le fait que, selon des sources militaires anonymes, des haut gradés interdirent le déplacement d’équipement ou de personnel militaires à l’extérieur du Québec, ce qui est hautement suspect et inquiétant. L’ancien ministre de la Défense de Brian Mulroney, le séparatiste Marcel Masse, avait fait transférer en 1992 des armements provenant de dépôts militaires à Moncton, Ottawa et Toronto vers d’énormes installations de cent millions de dollars dans l’Est de Montréal. La presse exprima quelque inquiétude à l’époque, mais les plans furent quand même mis à exécution et résultèrent en une quantité disproportionnée de matériel militaire au Québec. Even more scandalous was the fact that, according to anonymous military sources, top-ranking brass had forbidden the removal from Quebec of military equipment or personnel, which is highly suspect and disturbing. Former National Defence Minister under Brian Mulroney, the separatist Marcel Masse, in 1992 transferred armaments from military depots in Moncton, Ottawa and Toronto to enormous hundred-million-dollar installations in the East of Montreal. The press expressed some anxiety at the time, but the (transfer) plans were nonetheless put into operation, resulting in a disproportionate quantity of military equipment in Quebec.

 

À toute fin pratique, les médias ignorèrent cette affaire de sédition. Quelqu’un complotait-il un coup d’État ? Pour quelle autre raison Lucien Bouchard inciterait-il les soldats à faire défection ? Y avait-il une structure de commande séparatiste déjà en place pour diriger les déserteurs ? Y avait-il un plan d’action concernant les armements ? Avait-on sollicité et obtenu des serments d’allégeance au Québec ? Combien de séparatistes avaient infiltré nos forces armées ? Le haut commandement était-il au courant de telles possibilités ? Pourquoi Ottawa ne demandait-il pas une enquête et ne portait-il pas d’accusations ?

For all practical purposes, the media ignored this business of sedition. [The pre-referendum fax] Had someone planned a coup d’Etat? For what reason had Lucien Bouchard incited the soldiers to defect? Was a separatist command structure already in place to manage the deserters? Was there an action plan concerning armaments? Had oaths of allegiance to Quebec been solicited and obtained? How many separatists had infiltrated our Armed Forces? Was the top command aware of such possibilities? Why did Ottawa not order an investigation and bring charges?

Armaments from federal military depots in Moncton, Ottawa and Toronto, were transferred to Montreal in 1992! That was the year that Rhodes Scholar and “Liberal” Premier of Quebec, Robert Bourassa, had scheduled a referendum on “Sovereignty”2.

But, that’s not all. Federal military transfers into Quebec far exceed those reported by Diane Francis in her book, Maîtres Chanteurs Chez Nous. Dot Fuhrman’s research indicates that military transfers began in 1978, two years before the first referendum to “secede” in 1980.

Further, with regard to Montreal, according to Fuhrman, not only was ordnance transferred in, but a one-hundred-million-dollar installation was built to receive it. Said Fuhrman:

“operational bases in Toronto and Moncton were closed, and a $100 million-dollar military supply depot was built in the depressed east end of Montreal. (Tanks, armoured personnel carriers, howitzers, heavy-guns, trucks and all spare parts and supplies for Canada’s army are stored there, having been transferred from from bases like Renous, New Brunswick; Dartmouth, Nova Scotia; Wainwright, Alberta; and Nanaimo, British Columbia.). The other provinces are left with training facilities only“.

The following is Dot’s complete list of military, technology and other asset transfers to Quebec:
 

CANADIAN MILITARY HISTORY

By D. Fuhrman
 

Introduction: This is a report I have worked on for some time from material I had collected over the years. I hope you will find it interesting.
 

The Rise and Fall of Canada’s Military – 1945-1995
 

To understand why Quebec is now Canada’s Military force, we must start from the year 1945.
 

Canada in World War I – 1914-1918

  1. In 1914, Canada entered the War as a Colony of Great Britain, with one division;
  2. 620,000 enlisted; 66,000 gave their lives; 172,950 were wounded.

 

Canada in World War II – 1939-1945

  1. 1 million+ enlisted; 45,000 gave their lives;
  2. Royal Canadian Air Force assisted against the Axis;
  3. Royal Canadian Navy protected allied convoys across the Atlantic;
  4. Royal Canadian Army — Dieppe Raid, Divisions 1 and 5 in Italy, and the Normandy Invasion;
  5. Canada gave industrial help, munitions, motor vehicles, aircraft, and ships to the 5-year war.

At the end of World War II, Canada, with a population of only 11 million, had the world’s 3rd largest navy, 4th largest air force, and an army of 6 divisions. Canada’s armed forces, consisting then of an army, a navy and an air-force, fought bravely and we gained the respect of the world. We were no longer a colony of Great Britain, we became one of the world’s most respected military nations.

But, it didn’t take long to see our military reduced to less than one-third its original size. This came about because of the unrest in Quebec. During the Quebec Referendum of 1995, Quebec came close to separating from Canada and it was then they realized how ill-prepared militarily they were to protect themselves in case of war. Instead of building their own army, they found it more convenient to take ours, one piece at a time, with the blessings of Trudeau and Mulroney. Anything to appease Quebec, so they would not leave Canada. The Official Bilingualism Act gave Trudeau special powers, and inch by inch, changes were made for French Quebec to gain control of Canada’s army.

Days before the Referendum, P.Q. National defence leader, Jean-Marc Jacob, faxed a press release to all Quebec military bases urging Quebec-born soldiers to join a new Quebec army if they won the Referendum. How quickly Canada changed.

How and why our military was confiscated by Quebec.

In talking to some veterans at our Legion here in Kelowna, I learned that the transfer to Quebec of all materials such as ammunition, trucks, tanks, clothing and uniforms, guns, rifles, etc., began as early as 1978. Materials required for training men were the only things left for the other Provinces to control. It is obvious why New Brunswick, the only bilingual province, was trusted to have the Gun Registration headquarters.

Prime Minister Brian Mulroney’s Defence Minister, Marcel Masse3, takes the most credit for the military transfer to Quebec. His dislike for the Anglos was obvious when he immediately ordered all military bases to speak French to him first, conduct all business in French first, and to be a bilingual army by the year 2002. Marcel Masse is currently [YEAR?] Quebec’s foreign ambassador to France, a timely position.

Manitoba was Canada’s aviation center from the beginning of time, but Chrétien and Mulroney planned to move all of Manitoba’s aviational and intellectual industry to Quebec. And so, the big transfers began.

  1. Winnipeg’s Trans-Canada Airlines, born in 1937, was moved to Montreal in 1965 and renamed Air Canada;
  2. A merger of Canadian Pacific Airlines, Wardair, Pacific Western and C.O. Air was moved to Quebec under the umbrella of Air Canada;
  3. The most blatant transfer of power was Manitoba’s CF-18 fighter jet aircraft, the Hornets. The Canadair maintenance plant was hijacked to Bagotville, Montreal. Winnipeg’s bid was lower than Quebec’s. It was moved in 1986 [along with?] a $312-million interest-free loan. Not all engineers were transferred, some were imported from France.
  4. Control of De Havilland was purchased by Bombardier, which also acquired Learjet. The nation’s navigation manufacturing headquarters was now in Montreal;
  5. Half or more of Canada’s C.F.-18 aircraft is now in Quebec. The rest is in Edmonton;
  6. Bombardier is now the builder and maintenance provider of these aircraft and of other designs and sizes required by our airforce and by other countries;
  7. All maintenance, repairs, overhauling, and technical services for Military aircraft is in Bombardier’s Montreal-based defence services area, which was given 125 million dollars in 2003;
  8. France owns two islands (St. Pierre and Miquelon) near Newfoundland, with an air strip capable of serving big transport planes (in readiness during the Referendums);
  9. Trudeau’s Mirabel Airport outside of Montreal, Quebec, had a military purpose. We called it a white elephant then.
  10. In 2004, Chrétien, without tender, purchased from Bombardier 2 Challenger Jets for 100 million dollars for the Prime Minister’s private use even though the other two jets were still in good condition and the army was in need of Helicopters and other equipment;
  11. In November, 2005, Paul Martin promised to purchase sixteen (16) transport aircraft for our military for $4.6 billion dollars. (An election carrot)

 

SPACE AGENCY

The Canadian Space Agency in Ottawa was transferred to St. Hubert (Quebec) army base in 1983;

“The agency might be the best way to keep the country together,” said Lucien Bouchard. A good number of English scientists [quit?] when they were denied their request to accompany the move to Montreal.

Instantly, our space center became French, answering the phones in French first. Mulroney’s government planned to make Montreal Canada’s aerospace center alongside the aviation center.

  1. St. Hubert now has a new $80.5 million-dollar Space building;
  2. Bomen Inc. in Quebec City obtained a $4 million-dollar space contract;
  3. Spar Aerospace Ltd. of Ste.Anne-de-Bellevue, outside Montreal, obtained a $4 million-dollar space contract;
  4. CAE Electronics Ltd. of Montreal obtained a $6 million-dollar space contract;
  5. In 1992, the Space Agency had 268 employees, 2/3 of whom were Francophones, in a world where English is the space language, but here Anglos are in technical ghettos.
  6. In 1999, the Space Agency increased its personnel to 323;
  7. A space training school patterned after the Americans [?].

 

ROYAL CANADIAN NAVY

  1. Naval Reserve Headquarters for Canada was transferred from Halifax’s natural harbour to Quebec City in 1993;
  2. Three new Naval Reserve Divisions were established in Chicoutimi, Trois Rivières, and Rimouski in 1985. (The emblem on the new crest for the Fleet school is in French only with a fleur-de-lys on a maple leaf);

The big naval move to the Province of Quebec was to preserve Quebec’s strong naval heritage to honour the great French navigator and sea fighter Pierre D’Iberville, who tried unsuccessfully to drive the British out of the Hudson Bay Trading posts. This was one big lame excuse for the moves.

  1. In 1991, a new $36 million-dollar Canadian Forces Fleet School in Quebec, the headquarters for the Naval Reserve and the Naval Reserve Division HMCS Montcalm, moved to Pointe-a-Carcy, Quebec. (The move was made because the French sailors complained they did not want to train in English);
  2. The Naval Reserve lab. was moved from Esquimalt to Valcartier, Quebec;
  3. All submarine training and facilities are in the Province of Quebec;

The purchase of secondhand subs from Great Britain was a huge mistake. After training, the sailors didn’t know the hatch had to be closed in rough seas, and there was loss of life.

The navy has had difficulty finding crews for the 12 frigates, four destroyers, and two replenished ships.

In 1968, Prime Minister Trudeau unified the three forces into one, the only country in the world to do so. The army was transferred one piece at a time to Quebec. [Update: 4]

Quebec has all its forces in one close area in their province, while those of the rest of Canada are scattered across 4,000 miles. Guess who can mobilize first? British Columbia is helpless; it has to look to Edmonton for any disaster aid.

  1. As early as 1995 [year of the second referendum:KM], the Province of Quebec became Canada’s Military Headquarters;
  2. In 1991, Ottawa bailed out Mil-Davis of Quebec City at a cost of $263 million dollars towards the new frigates which came with a price tag in excess of $10.4 Billion;
  3. The Province of Quebec manufactures 85% of Canada’s ammunition;
  4. A modern, new training base [was built?] in St. Hubert for new Francophone recruits;
  5. The “Royal Roads” English Officer Training College in Victoria, B.C. closed in 1995. We have no English training base for unilingual English speakers;
  6. A French Officer training college, the Militaire Royal in Saint-Jean, Quebec, remained open because of Quebec’s demands. (Que. Beaudoin [who? Louise?] said the French will train for a Quebec army in case the Parti Québecois wins the next referendum on sovereignty;
  7. The Quebec college is French-only, but the Royal Military College in Kingston, Ontario has to be bilingual? The French soldier has two training bases, but the English soldiers have none;
  8. Operational bases in Toronto and Moncton were closed, and a $100 million-dollar military supply depot was built in the depressed east end of Montreal. (Tanks, armoured personnel carriers, howitzers, heavy-guns, trucks and all spare parts and supplies for Canada’s army are stored there, having been transferred from from bases like Renous, N.B; Dartmouth, N.S; Wainwright, Ab; and Nanaimo, B.C.). The other provinces are left with training facilities only;
  9. One-third (1/3) of our Combat units are in Quebec;
  10. Canada’s Army Headquarters, Commander and his staff, are located in St. Hubert, Quebec;
  11. The Officers School at Chilliwack, B.C. was moved to the Province of Quebec;
  12. Enlisting School at Chilliwack, B.C. was moved to the Province of Quebec;
  13. Enlisting School at Cornwallis [Province?] was moved to St. Jean, Quebec;
  14. Calgary’s P.P.C.L.I. Barracks were closed and merged with those at Edmonton. (The Edmonton Barracks sign is in French first, in English Canada);
  15. In 2002, the Official Languages Act was passed, enacting new armed forces language standards leaning towards more French control of our military forces. There is no advancement for an English officer past a Colonel unless he speaks excellent French;
  16. C.F.B in Chatham, New Brunswick, was moved to Miriramichi, Quebec. (The Headquarters for the Gun Registry is in Chatham)
  17. In 1992, with no tenders, a contract went to Montreal’s Bell Textron for 100 utility Helicopters. The 40-year-old Sea King helicopters can only carry water, transport mail and conduct searches;
  18. DART Canada’s “Disaster Assistance Team” of 200 special forces is in the Province of Quebec;
  19. In 2005, Canada’s army was using 17-year-old trucks plagued with difficulties, but the new Mercedes will work alongside the old; [?]
  20. Land Force Command: the Atlantic base is in Halifax; the Quebec-area base is in Montreal; Central Canada’s is in Toronto; and Alberta’s is in West-area Edmonton;
  21. SNC TEC, based in Le Gardeur, Quebec, signed a May 2004 supply contract with the U.S. military for small calibre bullets;

In Year 2005: retiring Lt. Gen. Mike Jeffery said “recent budget increases is not enough, our army is too small and stretched to the limit and adding new missions could be disastrous after 10 years of cuts”. He told our new army boss, Lt. Gen. Rick Hillier. Hillier wants more soldiers and fewer tasks.

Our Canadian army is struggling with lack of modern equipment, and a shortage of trained soldiers to send into combat. When our men first went into Afghanistan in the summer, they had dark green uniforms which they tried to disguise with paint. They lacked modern equipment, and even food. They had to rely on the American army for help in all areas including the use of the American hospital in Germany for our wounded men.

In Afghanistan, Canadian troops had access to U.S. airlift capability, Hercules and C-17 Heavy-lift aircraft, Chinook and Blackhawk troop transport, and they used their vehicles, the Humvee, while under the command of Major General Lewis MacKenzie. MacKenzie said “we can’t get to the war or home without the help of our allies”. The only thing we had that the Americans could use was our Coyote armoured vehicles. Since MacKenzie didn’t speak French, he was sidelined. We are minus one fine, brave General, but language takes precedence over all else.

Our military is helpless, with no heavy transport. So, since we are not helping the Americans in Iraq, we have had to call on the Russians to transport our heavy equipment to two disasters in 2005.

Bilingualism in the military is one good reason why recruits are harder to enlist and we are now turning our efforts to recruiting females. They are less interested in advancement and can fill spaces where they are so badly needed in our shrinking disastrous army.
 

BOMBARDIER

Bombardier, the World Industrial power Chief.

Over 50 years ago, in the 1950’s, Bombardier invented its first snowmobile, I know because I was in Quebec at the time. I watched Bombardier grow to become a world military power in the manufacturing of jets, regional aircraft, rail and subway transportation in New York and Britain; and in the manufacturing of equipment and motorized recreational products with factories in the Americas, Asia Pacific, and other parts of the world.

Bombarier’s revenue for fiscal year 2004 at Jan. 31 was $23.7 billion dollars Canadian.

In 1998, Bombardier was awarded a $2.65 billion contract — the largest with no competition. The company had contributed some $254,000 to the Liberal party since 1995.

On 23 November 2005, the Federal Government ordered 15 new transport planes at a cost of $5 billion dollars from Bombardier.

I must stop here because a huge book could be written about an empire that succeeded with the help of our government, who poured billions in loans, grants, contracts, and even guarantees in the billions, into Bombardier customers. Enough!

This report comes from material I’ve collected over the years and my own personal conclusions about the conditions of our army then, and now, in the year 2006.

If Quebec should separate and a disaster occurred such as an internal disturbance, floods, earthquakes, fires, etc., we would be like the U.S.A. army having all its arsenals in Confederate Territory in 1861.

— D. Fuhrman

 

That is not the end of developments in Quebec.

A March 9th, 1994 press release by citizen-journalist Serge Monast from his “International Free Press Agency And Network” stated the following:

UNITED NATIONS THREAT … Something quite frightening is in process here, 30 miles south east of Montreal (Que.), 35 to 40 miles north of New York State, in St. John (Que.) The very official Military College which has existed for decades to give French Canadians in Canada a University training to become army officers — like West Point in the United States — is being forced to shut down by the Canadian government under economic cuts, the Prime Minister of Canada said about three weeks ago.

This morning, March the 9th, on CBC National Radio Broadcast, sources from the government announced clearly that the College would still keep its first goals, but now under United Nations’ Command while the military personnel from this college will be moved to Kingston (Ontario) — North of Ft. Drum (N.Y.) — and the civilians from the same College would, for the most part, be laid off.

The news, released at 7:30 A.M. (Eastern time) on this matter, unveiled the fact that the United Nations has been looking for years in different countries for a sure place to establish an official Military Officers University for the future formation [training] of the United Nations’ Officers of the Multi-National armed forces.

LARGE TROOP TRANSPORTS … In the last three weeks, [March 9th, 1994] large military helicopter troop transports regularly cross the Canada-US borders into Canada from Maine, Vermont and New York State towards secret destinations. Strange — because Quebec is just a few months before its next Provincial election and Referendum concerning the Independence of Quebec, its separation from the rest of Canada. Looks like sort of a ‘Coup’ is in preparation, which might end up, according to some confidential sources, into the beginning of a state of civil war in eastern Canada.

Serge Monast concluded his press release with news of his upcoming publications:

CONCENTRATION CAMP BOOK…It will be only a week before receiving the first copies from the printshop. So, everyone who ordered it will have their own copy before the end of March. It will be my pleasure to personally autograph a copy to the Director of the APFN Network.

STRANGE SILENCE…Since about two weeks I did not receive my fax or communication from anybody in the states. My Fax is always open for my American compatriots.

Truly yours, and God Bless you all.
Serge Monast,
Canadian Journalist

Editor’s note: We strongly encourage support of highly decorated Canadian investigative journalist, Serge Monast, and the following, written by Serge, is how you can assist him and become informed in the process:

The main reason why it took so long, from November 1993 until now, to finally have this first book on The United Nations Concentrations Camps in America published deals with security problems. This is why, also, I couldn’t tell anyone this book is to be, in fact, a series of four separate publications covering all the United Nations Conspiracy in America. For example, on Feb 11, 1994, a man pretending to be an undercover RCMP — Federal Canadian Police said to me that they will have to do something else to stop me in my work to expose the underworld of the “World Government” because all previous economic pressures and threats seemed not to have discouraged me so far. I wanted to make sure to deliver as much information as possible to everybody before something might happen. I didn’t have any other choice than not telling anyone, before the first book of the series would be printed, what the main project of this exposure would be. I’m sure everybody will understand this.

Right now, actually, since I have in hand all the information to fully complete the series planned, I must hide myself somewhere in Canada in order to avoid any seizure of documents, any arrest or even any attempt against my life. I even had to cancel, for an indefinite period of time, all public appearances, so my financial budget is getting low and hard to live with.

THE UNITED NATIONS CONCENTRATION CAMPS PROGRAM IN AMERICA, a series of four books that will be published one after another in 1994, each book to be between 125-150 pages with “Official Documents’ and “Maps” reprinted. — Is anybody aware of the fact that in Jan. 9;4 the very Official Quebec League of Rights and Liberties has publicly accused me of racism only because I was using some extracts from the newspaper The Spotlight, and even published something about that?

The Titles of each Book in the series are:

COUP D’ETAT AND WAR PREPARATIONS IN AMERICA, Book I; $12. U.S.
BIRTH OF A POLICE STATE IN AMERICA, Book II; $12. U.S.
THE CONCENTRATION CAMPS’ PROGRAM, Book III; $12. U.S.
THE UNITED NATIONS MEDICAL CONSPIRACY AND SLAVE LABOR IN AMERICA, Book IV; $12. U.S.

(All prices are Postage and Handling included). Donations are more welcome to help.

For those interested in obtaining each book after each printing, send Postal or Bank money order to: Mr. Serge Monast, P.O. Box 359, Mansonville, Qué., Canada J0E 1X0. (PHONE NUMBER AND ALL INFORMATION TO BUY ARE NO LONGER VALID) Jacques Clouseau

Thank you, and God Bless you all.

The above article appeared in Contact: The Phoenix Project (15 March 1994, p. 22 of 32).

http://phoenixarchives.com/contact/1994/0394/031594.pdf

Serge Monast’s two forthcoming books on these subjects Concentration Camp Program in North America (now published, over 100 pages, with Maps), and his Vaccine, Military Experimental Medicine and Liquid Crystals (to be published shortly, also over 100 pages), each $16 American, can be ordered from Mr. Monast at Box 359, Mansonville, Quebec J0E 1X0, phone and fax 514-244-6288, 24 hours daily.

Notes: Corruption in Canada was published in 1994 and Serge Monast was still alive. He died many years ago and this information to buy the books is completely obsolete. However, I have found this link on the Web:

http://www.texemarrs.com/122002/concentration_camps_in_america.htm

Some nine years ago a French-Canadian reporter named Serge Monast called the ministry, desperate to speak with me personally. Mr. Monast stated he had come into possession of documents which proved the existence of a secret plan for a concentration camp system throughout North America. He sent them to me and, after a parallel investigation of my own, I became convinced the documents were authentic. Serge Monast was telling the truth. The horrible, horrible truth.

Not too long afterward, Serge Monast, a vigorous man in his 40s, died unexpectedly of a brief and mysterious illness. His friends suspected foul play, but there was no definite proof he was murdered. Just before he died, Serge wrote to tell me he would be contacting me soon to give me details of stunning new information he had discovered about the concentration camps, including a map pinpointing locations. Information which, Serge assured me, “will blow your mind.”

I never received that information. Serge Monast died before he could get it to me. I made a promise back then that I would get to the bottom of this matter and report the truth to you, the dear readers of Power of Prophecy newsletter, who truly care for humanity and are concerned about the rapid growth of the Police State.

Now, after years of intensive research and investigation, I have just released my latest video, Gulag USA——Concentration Camps in America (Available in VHS or DVD). In this jaw-dropping new video, I present a mountain of new evidence and facts with many photographic materials. I encourage you to obtain a copy of this revealing and documented video. Judge the facts for yourself–and then act accordingly.

Publié par Clouseau à l’adresse 9.6.07 Liens vers ce message

______

1 See “The Secret Committee of Power” in Jean-François Lisée’s In The Eye of the Eagle (Boréal, 1991).

2

Robert Bourassa at the Quebec Summit, with Brian Mulroney, negotiating the annexation of Canada under NAFTA with Ronald Reagan.

Robert Bourassa at the Quebec Summit, with Brian Mulroney, negotiating the annexation of Canada under NAFTA with Ronald Reagan.

In 1991, Liberal Premier and Rhodes Scholar, Robert Bourassa, caused the Quebec Legislature to pass Bill 150 into “law”, calling for a Quebec referendum on “sovereignty” by no later than 1992. Bourassa was an economist and a big fan of the European Union. In 1976, while his good friend, Communist René Lévesque ran Quebec for the Parti Québécois, Bourassa went to live and teach in the EU in order to study that system. Which, of course, was also the system René Lévesque wanted for Canada, and the system Trudeau proposed to Lévesque the night before the 1980 referendum.

As there is no power in the Constitution of Canada for a province to secede, and as the Lawful Constitution of 1867 was moreover designed to deny any power to annex Canada to the USA or to dismantle Canada by secession, Bourassa’s 1991 “law” was void. It would be void, even had he “passed” it under the Lawful Constitution of 1867. By this, I mean that Trudeau’s “patriation” of 1982 is void. For more on that, read my introduction to Barry Lee Strayer’s “Patriation and Legitimacy of the Canadian Constitution“.
 

 

3

Marcel Masse, Nat. Def. Minister under Brian Mulroney, transferred vast amounts of federal military ordnance into Quebec in 1992.

Marcel Masse, Nat. Def. Minister under Brian Mulroney, transferred vast amounts of federal military ordnance into Quebec in 1992.

Marcel Masse was a Rhodes Scholar, also identified as a “radical”, a Canadian euphemism for Communist. Masse is said to have “flirted” with “separatism” while a part of the RIN. But, the RIN (Rassemblement pour l’indépendance nationale) was a sinister, far-left Communist organization which disbanded in 1968 to allow the new Parti Québécois to quietly absorb its members. It had begun in 1960 as a “citizens’ movement” which in March of 1963 became a political party.

“The Honourable” Marcel Masse was Clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to the Cabinet (June 5, 1979 to March 10, 1980). He was appointed a Member of the Queen’s Privy Council on November 4, 1993 by Prime Minister Jean Chrétien.

Following his term as Clerk of the Privy Council, Masse served as President of the Canadian International Development Agency, Under-Secretary of State for External Affairs, Canadian Executive Director of the International Monetary Fund and Secretary to the Cabinet for Federal-Provincial Relations.

After his election to the House of Commons in 1993 as part of the Government of Prime Minister Chrétien, Masse also became Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, President of the Treasury Board, Minister responsible for Infrastructure and Minister responsible for Public Service Renewal.

Masse worked for the World Bank prior to his death on August 25, 2014.

4

L-R: Lester Pearson and Paul Hellyer, 1965, initiated the unification of Canada’s Armed Forces.

L-R: Lester Pearson and Paul Hellyer, 1965, initiated the unification of Canada’s Armed Forces.

“On 1 February 1968, one of the most important events of Canada’s military history took place when the law that eliminated the Royal Canadian Navy, the Royal Canadian Air Force and the Canadian Army went into effect, and the three proud military services ceased to exist… Since then, various dominant and, at times, competing concepts have influenced and shaped the evolution of the Canadian Forces (CF) as an institution, but none of those has had a more dramatic impact and long-lasting effect than the ideas that the Liberal Government of Lester B. Pearson and his strong-minded and ambitious Minister of National Defence, Paul T. Hellyer, brought into defence in the spring of 1963.”

This early period is interesting, because everything aimed at North American Union starts to happen at once. ● In 1960, a slew of Communist groups emerge as Quebec “separatists”; ● the Liberal government of Jean Lesage makes a first attempt to construct a Communist Plan to run Quebec; ● in late 1962, law professor Trudeau’s student, Bernard Landry (future Premier and sponsor of the model parliament for North America after 9/11) leads a student riot against English Canada that may have been designed by Trudeau, himself. Known as the “Gordon Incident,” it is literally pre-figured in Trudeau’s “New Treason of the Clerics,” a few months earlier. ● That creates the environment for the Castro-trained Communist FLQ terrorists in 1963 to commence their murder, kidnapping, and bombing spree, mis-portrayed by mainstream press and media as an ethnic revolt by “ultra-nationalist French Canadians” against Canada; (by 1968, the Edmund Burke Society in Scarborough will ask, “Why haven’t they told you the FLQ is Communist?”); ● in 1963, Soviet agent Pearson launches a royal commission as a pretext to (unlawully) convert Confederation to multiculturalism (which Trudeau demands as well, in his 1962 April issue of his pro-Soviet magazine, Cité Libre. Trudeau calls it “polyethnic pluralism”; ● in 1964, René Lévesque twice urges high-school children (close to voting age) to take up “guns and dynamite” if Canada won’t give Quebec its new “associate state” system; ● on 10 October 1964, Queen Elizabeth II visits the Quebec City Legislature and calls Confederation an “outdated protocol”. She demands a new constitution in the form of an “agreement“, and implies a referendum will ensue; ● on 10 November 1964, the Queen’s Communist Minister, René Lévesque, in office as one of Lesage’s “Liberals”, appears on French tv in his official capacity as a Minister, calling for the complete “restructuring” of Canada to suit the “needs” of Quebec, portrayed as ethnic needs: cultural and linguistic. (However, 8 years later, in 1972, a French-only manifesto of Lévesque’s Parti Québécois says Quebec needs full sovereignty to construct a Communist plan.); ● In 1965, the constitutionally guaranteed French-Canadian Catholic public school system is eliminated by a team of Rhodes Scholars, paving the way for non-Catholic mass-immigration; ● in the autumn of 1965, The Marxist Quarterly publishes new constitutions for Quebec and Canada;●  in the summer of 1967, on Canada’s centenary, French President Charles de Gaulle hurls the slogan of the Communist “separatists” from the balcony at Montreal City Hall: “Vive le Quebec libre!” (Long live free Quebec!). “Former” Marxist-Leninist leader, Jean-François Lisée, in his book, “Dans L’Oeil de l’Aigle” will ask, had Charles De Gaulle “targeted Canada to strike the USA?”; ● in 1963-68, from Pearson to Trudeau, Paul Hellyer supervenes the unprecedented merger into one new entity of Canada’s three Armed Forces. ● By at least 1978, Canada’s “Red” federal level is transferring federal ordnance into Quebec, with a Quebec referendum on the new system for Canada on the way in 1980; ● in 1982, the lawful Constitution is replaced by a socialist constitution subordinating Canada to the U.N. as future world government. ● The escalation continues for decades: mass immigration is employed to change the population to fit the upcoming new form of multicultural government; ● referendums are interspersed with phony attempts to “amend” the 1982 “coup” constitution to give Quebec an implied “power” to “secede” (facilitating international state recognition); ● referendums, even rigged ones, fail; ● the 1995 referendum fails, a hard blow to the globalists. The CFR sends a committee to Congress in September 1996 to plead for common institutions for Canada and America — precisely the institutions wanted by Communist Quebec with the rest of Canada, and which slipped from its reach with the failure of the 1995 referendum; ● the new Supreme Court of Canada (post-1982) concocts a pretext in 1998 to judicially enforce the dismantling of Canada after one more referendum; ● North America is “attacked” to unify the continent under a military perimeter, pending the dismantling by “secession”; ● in America, leftists spearhead a “nullification” movement whose corollary is the mass secession of the States.

5

A Communist State of Quebec

A Communist State of Quebec

In his 1995 book, The Perestroika Deception, KGB defector, Anatoliy Golitsyn, put forward a theory of Communist world conquest. The USSR, said Golitsyn, did not “collapse”, it went underground. At the surface, the “new” Russia cosmetically adopted forms and appearances contrived to encourage Western “co-operation” and “convergence”. This would allow Soviet deep penetration of Western civilization.

Arguably, neo-Soviet/North American “convergence” has proceeded to such an extent that today, under Northcom, after 9/11, the U.S. Armed Forces are dangerously intertwined with the de facto Armed Forces of a nascent Communist-controlled State of Quebec.

Terrorist Activities in North America By Lawrence Patton McDonald

Congressman Lawrence Patton McDonald, M. D., April 1, 1935-September 1, 1983

Congressman Lawrence Patton McDonald, M. D., April 1, 1935-September 1, 1983

From: Trotskyism and terror : the strategy of revolution (1977) by Congressman Lawrence Patton McDonald

Chapter 8

Terrorist Activities in North America

There are two Trotskyite organizations in Canada. One of these, the League for Socialist Action/Ligue Socialiste Ouvrière LSA/LSO, supports the minority Leninist-Trotskyist Faction which believes terrorism may be a useful tactic in the future. The other, the Revolutionary Marxist Group, RMG, which has its principal base among French-speaking Canadians in Quebec, is a staunch supporter of the “terrorism now” International Majority Tendency.

During the 1970 wave of terrorism by the Front de Libération du Québec, FLQ, Canadian Trotskyites tried to maintain a low profile. They were embarrassed by the open support of terrorism in Canada by their British com­rades in the International Marxist Group, IMG, and its publication, at that time called The Red Mole.

Joseph Hansen of the Socialist Workers Party described the problem of his Canadian comrades:

“While the Canadian Trotskyists were trying to differentiate their own position from the ultraleft one taken by The Red Mole, they were confronted by an even worse problem — what to do about the remarks made by Comrade Tariq Ali on a television panel filmed at Oxford by CTV, the national Canadian television net­work. This program was shown throughout Canada, while our comrades, like the rest of the left, were doing their best to mobilize a massive defense against the repression.

Some very provocative questions were directed at Comrade Ali. In answering, he did not appear to keep well in mind the situation in Canada and the need to help to the best of his ability in mobilizing a broad defense against the repression.

For instance, he was asked: “Do you believe, sir, that society today has reached the point where you see you have to use violence to achieve your ends?”

Comrade Ali replied: “I would say that this is largely a tactical question, depending precisely on the degree of opposition which we encounter in our struggle for socialism. But briefly, the answer is yes. I think that to achieve the ends we believe in ////////////// to the establishment of a socialist republic. I believe that a certain element of violence is absolutely necessary.”

Another provocative question was: “When you were president of the Oxford Debating Union did you not invite Governor Wallace of Alabama to speak at the Oxford Union?”

Comrade Ali answered: “Yes. Do you know why? Because we would have killed him.”

That did not come off so well, and Comrade Ali was soon explaining: “Of course, when I say, ‘Kill him,’ I don’t mean it necessarily literally. It’s a tactical question. If I believed we could get away with killing him we would. It is a question of if you are organized to do so. I don’t think we are. I meant kill him politically. That is what we wanted to do, but that wouldn’t have taken place because Wallace wouldn’t have got further past Oxford Station.”

The setting for broadcasting this TV program, it should be underlined, was Canada in the midst of a great police hunt for urban guerrillas charged with kid­napping and murder. It was shown on the television screens during a repression in which our own headquarters and the homes of many comrades were raided, and two of our leaders were thrown into prison.

Comrade Ali did what he could to turn the provocative questions into a high-level dialogue on the difference between “individual terror” with mass support and “individual terror” without mass support — a distinction a bit too fine, one must suppose, for the Canadian audience to appreciate at the moment. “At times,” he said, “1 think that individual terror becomes necessary. I don’t believe in individual terror as a principle; I am completely opposed to it. I’ll give you a concrete instance. I don’t believe in solving this particular argument by shooting off a few people, who are making rude noises. Nor do I think individual terror can in itself bring you any nearer to what we believe in. Of course not. I believe that individual terror is justified when you have a mass movement, when you have mass support inside a particular society, then it is justified.”

Tariq Ali serves on the Fourth International Executive Committee under the alias “Ghulam.”2 He receives his salary from a U.S. tax-exempt organiza­tion, the Transnational Institute, TNI, of the Institute for Policy Studies, IPS, located in Washington, D.C. Ali, a Pakistani, is reportedly “working on a series of essays on Indian nationalism and communism” for the Trans­national Institute.3

The Institute for Policy Studies is a leftist think-tank which usually takes a pro-Soviet and pro-Cuban stance; and whose staff has included a variety of terrorist supporters and members of terrorist organizations. The Transna­tional Institute has offices both in Washington, D.C. and in Amsterdam, Holland. The TNI is headed by Eqbal Ahmad and a leading Castroite propagandist, Saul Landau.

On September 9, 1976, Basker Vashee represented the Transnational Institute of IPS at a congressional conference on southern Africa sponsored by the Fund for New Priorities in America. The conference was held in the Russell Senate Office Building. Vashee was identified to the audience by the conference moderator as “a member of the national executive of ZAPU.”1 ZAPU is the Zimbabwe African Peoples Union, a Soviet-supported terrorist group in Rhodesia headed by Joshua Nkomo.

– 30 –

 
Author: McDonald, Lawrence Patton 1935-1983
Keywords: Communism, Trotskyism, Socialist Workers Party, terrorism
Publisher: Washington, D.C. : ACU Educational and Research Institute
Year: 1977
Language: English
Book contributor: dudeman5685
Collection: opensource
Notes: “The materials appearing here are reproduced from the Congressional Record, where Rep. McDonald published them at intervals beginning August 30, 1976, and concluding April 29, 1977”–P. 3.

Description

An impressive collection of facts and quotes concerning the Socialist Workers Party, its foreign ties, and alleged connection to terrorism; the author, Congressman Lawrence Patton McDonald, later vanished when the domestic Boeing he was on, flight KAL 007, was shot down in Soviet air space after it reportedly went off-course.