French-Canadian Marksman and FLQ hanger-on was the Spitting Image of Alleged Killer Oswald

Who Killed Kennedy?
And Who Killed Kennedy’s Killer’s Look-Alike?

Bachand or Oswald?

Lineup:  Bachand?  Oswald?

Can you pick Oswald out of this line-up?
Can you pick François Mario Bachand out of this lineup?

 

Fidel Castro & the assassination
of John Fitzgerald Kennedy

Fidel Castro founded the Quebec terrorist movement, the FLQ, which he began to set up with Belgian immigrant to Montreal (and possibly KGB agent) Georges Schoeters, during a meeting between them in Montreal in early 1959.  FLQ is short for Front de Libération du Québec  (Quebec Liberation Front).

Castro’s 1959 visit to Montreal was organized by a Quebec criminal lawyer, Robert Daoust, whose primary client is later known to be the Cotroni mob.  Whether Daoust worked for Cotroni at the time he brought in Castro is unconfirmed.  However, it would be interesting to know, since the Cotronis had a special interest in the Liberal Party of Canada.  And it was the Liberals under Soviet agent Pearson, who used the existence of the FLQ and its 1960s bombing spree as a pretext in 1967 to order the set-up of the Parti Québécois (PQ).  These referendums benefit the Communist-controlled federal level of Canada, which can then appear to “save” Canada from Quebec “separatism” by negotiating the restructuring of all of Canada for Communism.

An American woman (Andrea Silverthorne) has a theory that an Oswald look-alike shot Kennedy because Oswald was not a marksman.  This is her solution to the “French connection” alleged in the Kennedy assassination.  Silverthorne suggests that Oswald double, François Mario Bachand, was a marksman.  He moreover hung out with actual FLQ terrorists, Silverthorne observes, which made him seem to be one of them … and might have been a cover for him.

Bachand was bailed out of jail by a newspaper reporter a couple of weeks before President John F. Kennedy was shot.  On release from jail, the Oswald look-alike promptly went underground.

Silverthorne identifies the French Canadian François Mario Bachand as possibly having shown up on-site in Texas for the shooting (grassy knoll), accompanied by his wife and small child.

Years later, in 1971, Bachand himself was assassinated execution-style, in Paris.  The execution occurred shortly after Soviet agent, Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau, ordered it; which is a criminal act:  government is not entitled to murder a citizen in cold blood.  (Tell it to Barack Hussein Obama, who assumes a “presidential power” to exterminate American citizens, and other innocent bystanders).

Trudeau, who led a Communist delegation at Moscow in 1952 on Communist nickel 1, was a Communist like his predecessor, Soviet Agent LesterMikePearsonPearson had been exposed by former GRU (Soviet military intelligence), Elizabeth Bentley, in the U.S. McCarran hearings.  Despite written warnings from the FBI to the RCMP, Pearson steadily rose through the ranks.

Interest in the killing of Bachand deepens when we learn that the deed was “recommended” to Communist Trudeau by his fellow-Communist Jean-Pierre Goyer.  Said Alan Stang in 1971:

Pierre Elliott Trudeau made Jean-Pierre Goyer Solicitor-General for Canada …

“when Parliament was not in session and could not question him. … Goyer … has been involved in several pro-Communist fronts.  And he has attended Communist meetings behind the Iron Curtain.  Like his friend Trudeau, he is a revolutionary.”

It was alleged that Trudeau himself was to be a target of assassination on Bachand’s imminent return to Quebec.  Thus, the notion of a capability or intent for assassination was clearly associated with this Oswald look-alike.

In his chapter on “The Assassination of François Mario Bachand”, labor journalist Louis Fournier, in his F.L.Q.  Histoire d’un mouvement clandestin (1982) UQAM Editions Quebec/Amerique, 1982, 509 pp. (first published in French in 1982) states that:

[Translation:]  “[w]ithin the F.L.Q., the major Spring event is the assassination in Paris, on March 29th [1971], of François Mario [400] Bachand, one of the leaders-in-exile of the movement.  Bachand, aged 27, is found dead in his flat in Saint-Ouen in a working-class suburb of Paris, felled by two bullets from a 22-caliber revolver shot into the back of the neck at close range.  The matter has never been officially clarified.  Mario Bachand, who lived in semi-clandestinity, was getting ready to return to Quebec; he had taken steps in that direction with Maître Bernard Mergler.  He wanted to regularize his situation after having fled to Cuba in April 1969, while he was out on bail on altogether minor charges connected to “Operation McGill français” (the other accused had been cleared).  Still a partisan of the F.L.Q., he was nonetheless in disagreement with some of his comrades, due notably to his tactical support for the P.Q.

[…]

In a secret text written shortly before his death, Bachand would advocate that Québécois militants “move to total clandestinity” because the repression had become too strong.  “What is needed,” he said, “is to form selected armed groups, which will attack certain objectives at very precise moments.  In addition, it is necessary that a certain form of urban guerilla be maintained, for example bombs in anglophone neighborhoods, hold-ups, well timed executions of certain politically dangerous persons such as Jean Drapeau and Pierre Trudeau“, because the execution of Pierre Laporte constituted a “positive” gesture.

Trudeau’s execution order allegedly arose from concern that Bachand might be able to achieve his aim.  However, there is another reason clear from the same extract from Fournier why Trudeau would not have wanted Bachand to return to Quebec.  The “secret committee at Power” had ordered the set-up of the Parti Québécois to run referendums in Quebec as the “democratic” alternative to FLQ violence.  With the PQ holding seven seats in the Quebec Legislature in 1970, and hopes on the rise for an early referendum, the last thing Trudeau and his Reds now want is the return to Canada of Bachand.  This highly competent friend of the FLQ and organizer of leftist riots, including the perceived Communist Front of “Opération McGill français” in 1969, might have stirred up violence; and made the PQ’s “democratic option” defunct before it became fully operational.

Trudeau’s execution order targeting Bachand may have had more to do with keeping the PQ in power to facilitate his own planned negotiations with his Communist friend, Lévesque to restructure Canada.  This obviously was the aim at that time, and still is:  there is no other purpose to the Communist PQ.  Had Bachand stirred up social unrest and violence, the PQ would have come to an untimely end as a credible “political” alternative to the FLQ approach for taking Quebec out of Canada.

Thus, Bachand’s alleged intent to assassinate Trudeau might well have been a facade for the real objective:  protecting the Communist and terrorist-filled ranks of the Liberals’ “political solution,” the PQ, from disintegration.

Bachand:  the Kennedy “French Connection”?

Silverthorne has written up her theory that Bachand was the famed “French connection”, with astonishing pictures of BACHAND and OSWALD (above) at her web site, named for President John F. Kennedy’s proposed site of America’s first tidal power dam for cheap and plentiful energy:  the Passamaquoddy.  Her story is here:

Dream of Passamaquoddy

Adding my own speculation to the Silverthorne scenario:  if Fidel Castro ordered the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, he may have used François Mario Bachand — masked as an “FLQ” terrorist — to do (some of) the shooting, and Castro’s lifelong best friend Trudeau may have then closed the JFK file by having Bachand executed.

Bachand’s name comes up on the FLQ timeline at Wikipedia, which places Bachand in Cuba on several occasions in the years after the Kennedy shooting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Front_de_libération_du_Québec

This item on the Timeline is intriguing:

1971:

March 24, Solicitor General Jean-Pierre Goyer, Director General of the RCMP Security Service John Starnes and Deputy Solicitor General Ernest Côté meet.  Goyer orders Starnes to “neutralize” Mario Bachand [murder, assassinate, kill a Canadian citizen extra-judicially], in Paris, an operation that had been planned since February.  A heated exchange ensues; “Starnes objected that it would be pointless and hazardous and that the service was incapable of it.”  Goyer says he would consult with the Prime Minister.[22]

Footnote 22 cites a credible source:  McLoughlin, Michael.  “Last Stop, Paris:  the assassination of Mario Bachand and the death of the FLQ” (Viking, Toronto: 1998), p. 218.

Note the latter half of that title, “the death of the FLQ”.  As I theorize above, organizer Bachand may have been ordered killed to keep the PQ in power, by obstructing the return of the FLQ.

Indeed, journalist Louis Fournier notes:

[Translation:]  “[…] the death of François Mario Bachand coincided with an unprecedented offensive of the information and security services against any attempt to relaunch the F.L.Q.

Fournier also declares:

[Translation:]  Two major theories may explain the death of Francois Bachand:  either he was “executed” by a commando of former comrades in disagreement with him, as a settling of accounts which would be absolutely unique in the whole history of the F.L.Q.; or he was taken down in a special operation of the police security and information service.

That latter operation would have been run by Trudeau-appointee and fellow Iron-Curtainer, Jean-Pierre Goyer. 2

The identity of Bachand’s executioners is unknown, although Fournier gives this account of the possible penetration of Bachand’s residence by camouflaged security agents:

[Translation:]  In Paris, Bachand was living with a young arts Professor from Occitan University, Pierre Barral, [401] who had links with the “Mouvement pour la défense des prisonniers politiques québécois” [“Movement for the defence of the Québécois political prisoners”, meaning the F.L.Q. terrorists:KM].  Very few people are aware of his refuge at Saint-Ouen, other than a few contacts he believed he could trust such as François Dorlot, a militant of the P.Q. close to the F.L.Q. at the start of the 1960s.  Bachand was aware, however, for some time, that he was being followed; he had told his sister Michèle, a member of the executive of the M.D.P.P.Q. that he believed so, and his friend Clermont Bergeron of the C.S.N. who had come from Montreal to see him a few days before his death.

[…]

[Translation:]  According to the testimony of Professor Barral, when Bachand was away from the flat, the night before his assassination, two young people called on him, one of whom seemed to be disguised as a female transvestite.  They said they had fled Quebec and that they needed help.  They told Barral:  “François doesn’t know us personally, but we know him.”

However, what is truly remarkable about Bachand’s execution  whether it was carried out by Trudeau and the RCMP or not (and it was murder of a Canadian, if it was) is that it was “ordered” by an elite Communist, Jean-Pierre Goyer.  Goyer’s appointment by Communist Trudeau as head of Canada’s national police is discussed by American anti-Communist Alan Stang in an extract of his 1971 article at my blog:

https://nosnowinmoscow.wordpress.com/videos/stang-part-3/

Wrote Stang:

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

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

So, the man “running the national police of Canada” ordered the execution of an Oswald look-alike (Bachand) who frequented the Castro-founded FLQ & was bailed out (in sufficient time to be able to shoot JFK, if that was his mission); and Goyer did so in final consultation with Castro’s best friend, Pilgrim of Moscow Pierre Elliott Trudeau.

Jean-François Lisée (the current Communist leader of the Communist Parti Québécois, elected on 7 October 2016), confirms in his 1990 book, Dans l’Oeil de l’Aigle that Bachand was intimate with Cuba prior to 1970 for at least a year and a half:

[Translation:] Three Felquists in a hurry to know all about guerilla techniques (François Bachand, Raymond Villeneuve and Gaston Collin) had already spent some 18 months in Cuba prior to 1970.  There again, Langley had presented to the Secret Service representatives a defector who had told somewhat alarming stories about the training the Cubans were giving to the Quebecers.  The CIA believed the testimony was reliable, but in Ottawa, the Mounties had their doubts.  “We know from people who had seen them, that the Felquists in Cuba had no training, they were playing billiards in the hotel,” said one Canadian officer.”*

I, for one, doubt the “doubts” of the Mounties, which do not seem rational in the circumstances.  François Mario Bachand and other terrorist leaders did not go to Cuba to play pool in the hotel lounge.

The assassination of Cuba-trained Bachand in effect protected the Communist subversion of Quebec, and Canada, and of North America, as currently then organized in the hands of the corporate fascists behind the secret committee at Power Corporation.  This cabal, with links to the Red-friendly Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) which co-financed the 1917 Bolshevik “revolution”, had orchestrated the set-up of the Communist Parti Québécois.  Power Corporation then had financed Communist Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s federal election campaign.  It was clearly intended that Trudeau “negotiate” with “his own” Communist PQ to restructure Canada for Communism.

It is therefore my view that François Mario Bachand may well have been a marksman; he may have been recruited by Cuba locally; and he may well have been in Texas on the infamous day.  Bachand most surely would have upset the “bourgeois” Communist apple cart of Power Corporation’s designer “political” party, the Parti Québécois, Power’s ultimate vehicle for dismantling and restructuring all of North America for corporate-fascist world government.
______
 
1  Just how “Red” was Pierre Elliott Trudeau?  Read my exclusive English translation of Trudeau’s 7-part series for Le Devoir  on the 1952 Moscow “economic” summit organized by V.V. Kuznetsov of Soviet Intelligence:  “I’m Back From Moscow“.
 
2  Killing a Canadian citizen outside the law is hardly an “operation”.  It is cold-blooded murder, for which those who discussed and planned it are culpable, whether they carried it out, or not.  Goyer, Trudeau, and Starnes all should have been charged and tried at least for intent.

– 30 –

 

More on Willy Brandt, René Lévesque and the Socialist International

René Lévesque - Attendez que je me rappelle...

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

Let’s take another look at that letter.

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

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

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

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

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

The New American goes on:

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

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

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

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

It says:

“SOCIALISM AND WORLD PEACE

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

Again, The New American:

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

 

The Parti Québécois Adheres To The Goal
Of World Government:

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

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

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

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

Flattr this

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Perreault continued:

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

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

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

The Parti Québécois is therefore obviously Communist.

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

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

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

Building A North American CommunityIt should be no surprise that René Lévesque himself called his plan for the re-federation of Canada with a (temporarily) sovereign Quebec both a new “Canadian Union” and a new “Canadian Community.” These designations must be familiar…. they are clearly echoed in the Council on Foreign Relations’ 2005 blueprint for “Building A North American Community,” commonly known as the North American Union. They were also based on the European Economic Community, and the European Union.

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

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

– 30 –

Flattr this

 

UPDATE: FREE DOWNLOAD now available for researchers:

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

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

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

OR:

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

 

 

 

 

“The Man-Wolf” in a Political Manifesto of the Parti Québécois Calling for “A New Social Model”

The Man-Wolf in a Political Manifesto Calling for A New Social Model

A new segment of my exclusive English translation of the 1972 manifesto of the Parti Québécois for a Communist state of Quebec has been added to the Library tab. Pages 29 through 38 cover two chapters and contain some startling information for researchers into the “New World Order”.

In the chapter entitled “Toward a new social model”, the concept of “The Man-Wolf” in a political manifesto is odd enough. However, it might be a Marxist allegory, because I have seen it elsewhere, if only once in a socialist context. More odd, that metaphor is linked to a seemingly esoteric or religious idea of man as a “perfectible being”. The few paragraphs under this heading are enigmatic, and conclude with the following assertion:

Il faut extirper autant et aussi vite que possible, cette fausse idée de la liberté individuelle, qui n’aboutit en pratique qu’à la liberté du renard dans le poulailler, du fort aux dépens du faible, du gros aux dépens du petit, et qu’on reconnaît dans la plupart des refrains qui chantent les attraits les plus douteux du statu quo.”

“It is necessary to extirpate as much and as rapidly as possible, this false idea of individual liberty, which in practice is tantamount to the liberty of the fox in the hen-house, of the strong at the expense of the weak, of the large at the expense of the small, and which one recognizes in the majority of refrains which extol the most dubious attractions of the status quo.”

As we might fully expect from various stripes of Communists, personal liberty is on its way out; yet the manifesto equates the “new social model” with freedom and “fertile self-determination”.

The rather chilling spectre hovering perceptibly across these paragraphs is the implication of some kind of State-imposed and State-enforced individual and group (“community”) “evolution” in the Darwinian sense, which in my mind seems to invoke the 1946 Unesco: its purpose and its philosophy, penned by Julian Huxley, brother of Aldous (the LSD researcher and author of Brave New World, 1931), calling for some kind of worldwide controlled human “evolution” to a higher stage.

My impression of this potential link of the 1972 manifesto to the UN is underscored by the fact that the tactic of setting up the Parti Québécois emerges from the same nexus of people around Cité Libre review in the 1950s, described by Quebec historian Robert Rumilly. That group were closely affiliated with the Esprit group in France around Emmanuel Mounier and Jacques Maritaine, whose names appear in a search of the UNESCO web site. I may write more about this another day.

Also of interest are the various references to redesigned municipalities, and concerns with regions or regionalism. These might be expected in a Communist context where nations are gradually eroded toward a “world state” in which nothing would remain but cities and regions.

Read my new English segment of the 1972 Parti Québécois manifesto for a Communist State of Quebec,(Quand nous serons vraiment chez nous). These are pages 29-38, including the chapters entitled “Political organization” and “Toward a new social model.

If you read French, I’ve scanned the original 1972 manifesto and put it online here:

Quand Nous Serons Vraiment Chez Nous 1972
http://en.calameo.com/books/000747447ddd8b11af7e2

Unfortunately, Calaméo no longer allows free downloads. I’m trying to find somewhere else to provide these documents to you, free of charge.

– 30 –

 

UPDATE: FREE DOWNLOAD now available for researchers:

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

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

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

OR:

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

 

 

 

 

René Lévesque’s 1982 Letter to Willy Brandt (Socialist International)

 Willy Brandt, René Lévesque

L-R: Willy Brandt, René Lévesque

The Letter

In their French article entitled “Adhésion du Parti Québécois à l’Internationale Socialiste“, the Fédération des Québécois de Souche claims credit for a literal scoop from the archives of the Parti Québécois. And that is a scan of the letter dated December 6th, 1982, sent by René Lévesque to then-President of the SI, Willy Brandt.

The letter requests full membership of the Parti Québécois in the Socialist International, deemed by sources at The New American to be an extension of the original “Communist International”. However, Canada’s New Democratic Party — currently led by Thomas Mulcair (married to his Jewish psychologist) and formerly led by the late Jack Layton — has always been a full member of the Socialist International, a status the NDP inherited from its political forebear, the CCF.

My request to the Quebec Provincial Archives for a certified copy of the original letter met the response that they do not have this particular letter. The Provincial Archive suggests that the original letter must still be with the Parti Québécois. So, this really is a scoop. Congratulations to the F.Q.S.!

I claim credit for the first English translation of it, and for its first publication in English, here. See below. Downloads are available at the very end.
 

Exclusive English translation by NoSnowinMoscow.com:

7370 St-Hubert Street
Montreal, Quebec H2R 2N3
Tel.: (514) 270-5400

Quebec, on December 6th, 1982

Mr. Willy Brandt
President of the Socialist International
88a, St John’ s Wood High street [sic]
LONDON NW8 7SJ
Great Britain

Mr. President,

Founded less than fifteen years ago, counting more than 200,000 members, well rooted in all milieux, carried to power in 1976, seeing its mandate renewed at the time of the general election of April 1981, financed solely by the individuals who compose it, the Parti Québécois has become one of the most important mass parties of the western world, especially if account is taken of the fact that Quebec counts only a little more than six million inhabitants.

Bearer of the national and progressive aspirations of the Québécois people, it intends to affirm its presence on the international scene and to multiply contacts and exchanges with political organizations of other countries which share similar objectives.

In this spirit, in accordance with the wish expressed by the delegates brought together at the national congress last February, the Parti Québécois, by the resolution of its national Executive council dated November 26th, 1982, solicits full membership of the Socialist International, this absolutely essential world gathering place of the forces of progress and freedom.

Condemning any authoritative and oppressive form of government, communist or fascist in nature, conscious also of the need to correct the abuses of capitalism while causing the rights and freedoms of the individual and the general interest of the community to prevail over those of privileged and too-powerful groups, the Parti Québécois adheres without any restriction to the principles stated in the declarations of Frankfurt (1951) and Oslo (1962).

In its official program, the Parti Québécois declares that the main objective of every social-democratic party is:

“To unceasingly increase the democratic level of a society. It is not only a question of theoretically ensuring fundamental freedoms and the maintenance of democratic institutions, but to make it so that these freedoms really can be within the reach of one and all and that these institutions are used to increase the freedom of those who are the most disadvantaged. What is required is thus the elimination of discrimination and of the inequalities in human relations, the abolition of all class privilege, growth in quality of life for the most disadvantaged people of our society and the broadest possible participation of every citizen in decisions which affect them”.

In fact, as much by its program as by the policies carried out since it came to power, our political organism is conducting an experiment at one and the same time original and promising, unique in North America, of national emancipation, of social and economic democracy, of respect for the rights of minorities and of ethnic groups.

The following initiatives in particular have been taken: a referendum on the political status of the Québécois people; radical democratization of the financing of political parties, excluding by law any participation other than that from individuals, with supplemental aid from the State; sustained efforts in order to reduce the tax burden of persons of modest income and to more equitably redistribute the collective wealth; a public and universal regime of auto insurance; extension of and new strength breathed into the public sector of the economy; measures with a view to furthering unionization and ensuring better protection for the health and safety of employees; a “Charter of the French language” aimed at ensuring equal opportunity for the vast majority of French-language Québécois workers, while recognizing and protecting the rights of the anglophone minority; decentralization of the governmental apparatus and increased participation of citizens in the administrative authorities; rigorous protection of the environment and agricultural territory; initial attempts at co-decision among the principal socioeconomic agents; and finally a Charter of rights and freedoms of the person which we believe the most progressive in America.

For all the reasons which I have just evoked, I express with confidence, Mr. President, the wish that our membership application be favorably received by your management Office.

With my best regards,

René Lévesque
President of the Parti Québécois

 

Transcription of the original French letter:

7370, rue St-Hubert
Montréal, Québec H2R 2N3
Tel. : (514) 270-5400

Québec, le 6 décembre 1982

Monsieur Willy Brandt
Président de l’Internationale Socialiste
88a, St. John’s Wood High street
LONDRES NW8 7SJ
Grande-Bretagne

Monsieur le président,

Fondé il y a moins de quinze ans, comptant plus de 200 000 membres, bien enraciné dans tous les milieux, porté au pouvoir en 1976, voyant son mandant renouvelé lors du scrutin général d’avril 1981, financé uniquement par les individus qui le composent, le Parti Québécois est devenu un des partis de masse les plus importants du monde occidental, surtout si l’on tient compte du fait que le Québec ne compte qu’un peu plus de six millions d’habitants.

Porteur des aspirations nationales et progressistes du peuple québécois, il entend affirmer sa présence sur la scène internationale et multiplier les contacts et les échanges avec les formations politiques d’autres payes qui partagent des objectifs similaires aux siens.

Dans cet esprit, conformément au vœu exprimé par les délégués réunis au congrès national en février dernier, le Parti Québécois, par la résolution de son Conseil exécutif national en date du 26 novembre 1982, sollicite de devenir membre de plein droit de l’Internationale Socialiste, ce lieu de rassemblement mondial, absolument essentiel, des forces du progrès et de la liberté.

Condamnant toute forme autoritaire et oppressive de gouvernement, de nature communiste ou fasciste, conscient aussi de la nécessité de corriger les abus du capitalisme en faisant prévaloir les droits et libertés de la personne et l’intérêt général de la collectivité sur ceux des groupes privilégiés et trop puissants, le Parti Québécois adhère sans aucune restriction aux principes énoncés dans les déclarations de Francfort (1951) et d’Olso (1962).

Dans son programme officiel, le Parti Québécois déclare que l’objectif premier de tout parti social-démocrate est :

« D’accroître sans cesse le niveau démocratique d’une société. Il s’agit non seulement d’assurer théoriquement les libertés fondamentales et le maintien d’institutions démocratiques, amis de faire que ces libertés puissent être réellement à la portée de tous et de toutes et que ces institutions servent à accroître la liberté de ceux et de celles qui en sont le plus privés. Ce qui est recherché est donc l’élimination de la discrimination et des inégalités dans les relations humaines, l’abolition de tout privilège de classe, l’accroissement de la qualité de la vie pour les personnes les plus démunies de notre société et la plus large participation possible de chaque citoyen et de chaque citoyenne aux décisions qui les concernent ».

En fait, tout autant par son programme que par les politiques réalisées depuis qu’elle exerce le pouvoir, notre formation politique mène une expérience à la fois originale et prometteuse, unique en Amérique du Nord, d’émancipation nationale, de démocratie sociale et économique, de respect des droits des minorités et des groupes ethniques.

Les initiatives suivantes ont notamment été prises : référendum sur le statut politique du peuple québécois : démocratisation radicale du financement des partis politiques, excluant par la loi toute participation autre que celle des individus, avec une aide complémentaire de l’État; efforts soutenus afin d’alléger le fardeau fiscal des gens à revenu modeste et de redistribuer plus équitablement la richesse collective; régime public et universel d’assurance automobile; extension et vigueur nouvelle insufflée au secteur public de l’économie; mesures en vue de favoriser la syndicalisation et d’assurer une meilleure protection de la santé et de la sécurité des salariés; « Charte de la langue française » visant à assurer l’égalité des chances de la grande majorité des travailleurs Québécois, de langue française, tout en reconnaissant et protégeant les droits de la minorité anglophone; décentralisation de l’appareil gouvernemental et participation accrue des citoyens aux instances administratives; protection rigoureuse de l’environnement et du territoire agricole; premières tentatives de concertation des principaux agents socio-économiques; enfin une Charte des droits et libertés de la personne que nous croyons la plus progressiste en Amérique.

Pour toutes les raisons que je viens d’évoquer, je formule avec confiance, monsieur le président, le vœu que notre demande d’adhésion soit accueillie favorablement par votre Bureau de direction.

Avec l’expression de ma haute considération,

René Lévesque
Président du Parti Québécois

 

Download a word-searchable transcript of the 1982 French letter of René Lévesque to Willy Brandt, side by side with an Exclusive English translation:
http://www58.zippyshare.com/v/XsjzQB5i/file.html

Download a scan of the original 1982 French letter of René Lévesque to Willy Brandt:
http://www57.zippyshare.com/v/xlRWIfqG/file.html

 

The Plan for Quebec: Communist State?

The Plan for Quebec: Communist State? By Otto Kretzmer, Sunday, 16 April 2006, is originally a French post entitled “Le plan pour le Québec” at the blogspot “Le Complot Contre Le Québec” (The Plot Against Quebec).

English translation by Kathleen Moore for Habeas Corpus Canada, together with brief additions from other articles of Mr. Kretzmer, for a fuller picture.

In translating this article, I take no position on religion, except to attempt to convey the concerns of the article’s original author, Otto Kretzmer; and except to acknowledge absolutely the Constitutional nature for French Canadians of their entrenched right to their historic Catholic religion.
______________________________________________________

Separate Quebec from Canada? No!
Separate All of Canada from High Finance? Yes!

The idea of separatism in Quebec has been part of a communist plan to overthrow Quebec and Canada. With a foothold in Quebec, communism could take all of Canada as well. Independence is a communist-Marxist strategy to take power in a country. We have this example in a number of countries: separations in Vietnam, in Algeria, in Biafra, in Korea, in Bengla-Desh, in Pakistan, etc.

The Canadian Council of Protestant Churches, with its headquarters in Toronto, published a small brochure in 1969 entitled “Quebec’s Impending Fate Communist State?” (Le Québec deviendra-t-il un Etat communiste?) It is quite useful to re-read these extracts in 2005; we will therefore quote a few paragraphs from that brochure.

[Re-translating into English, for lack of a copy of the brochure:]

“The most militant Zone in Canada for communist activity is the Province of Quebec. The first goal adopted at the convention of the Communist Party of Quebec held in Montreal in 1967, was: “The establishment in Quebec, in Canada, and in the entire world, of a socialist society, and finally of a communist society.

Noting that their goals accord with the efforts of other revolutionary communist groups throughout the world, the convention proclaimed:

“This is an institution of the internationalism of the international proletariat, a science that the Communist Party of Quebec adopts proudly and which will guide us in our battle.”

The December 1967 Communist Manifesto of Quebec is an appeal to militants to establish first, a socialist state, by armed revolution if necessary, so as to finally arrive at communist dictatorship.

The Communist Party of Quebec declares in its Manifesto:

“The Communist Party of Quebec is the Marxist-Leninist Worker’s Party.”

This declaration has great significance. It identifies the Communist Party of Quebec with a tentacle of the World Communist Party, guilty of massacres, and the worst criminal atrocities against the peoples it has subjected to slavery. It represents the butchery of a hundred million persons whose only crime was to express their confidence in our democratic way of life, or who questioned the right of a small minority to impose their absolute will on the great majority.

This communist Quebec Manifesto sets out a plan of political and social action. This plan includes a new federal constitution, and a new constitution for Quebec, the right to self-determination for Quebec, and the privilege to separate from Canada if necessary.”

The Plan for Quebec – Communist StateSeparating Quebec from the rest of Canada is thus a plan of the Communist Party of Quebec, a plan announced in their Manifesto, a communist plan of conquest for Quebec and for the whole of Canada. Do not think that communism is dead and buried, even if some countries have succeeded in liberating themselves from this infernal slavery. Communism seeks to foment revolutions in countries to weaken the strength of their peoples, and to finally arrive at a world communist government. The Parti Québécois enters into the plans of the Communist Party of Quebec.

False Patriotism

The separatists say they are ardent defenders of the French language, of our culture, of our Quebec identity. However, they dissociate our culture from our Catholic faith transmitted by our ancestors. They are hardly concerned with the safeguard of Catholicism in Quebec. Their goal is to permanently annihilate it. These ardent “independentists” preach patriotism to us in every key, but they themselves work to achieve an atheistic and anticlerical communist plan, whether they know it or not.

In the name of false patriotism, they carry the Quebec people toward separation, which will spawn a bloody revolution, a civil war. Separatism flows from socialist-Marxist ideology. Those who fight the battle for separation in Quebec are not patriots, but veiled communists.

Marxist Constitutions

A great deal is heard about the preparation of a new federal constitution and a new constitution for Quebec*, about the “right to self-determination for Quebec”, a certain “sovereignty”. These changes correspond strangely with the 1967 Manifesto of the Communist Party of Quebec. Will Ottawa itself contribute to separating Quebec from Canada? Is the provocation of a civil war a part of the plot? Is the desire to establish atheistic, Marxist and communist constitutions in Quebec and in Canada to lead us into a tyrannical world government?

Canada and all the Provinces are the slaves of Big Business. This is the real problem. Our governments, from the biggest to the smallest, are weighted down with public debt. When will they break loose these chains of banker dictatorship and stop genuflecting at the feet of the money men to borrow numbers? The thing to be changed in the federal and provincial constitutions is to detach Canada and the Provinces from High Finance, our common enemy. The law which empowers banks and private institutions to create money must be abolished.

It is also important to realize that the concept or the word “communism” is employed as a mask for the New World Order, which was begun by the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 and continues unabated up to the present.

The energies and the idealism of the working people are used by the protectors of such revolutions – the Big Bankers – to demolish what has been created methodically by generations before us. At the price of blood and destruction, the power of the Bankers is expanded and consolidated, whereas, the proletariates increasingly find themselves worse off than they were at the start. They face the prospect of nothing less than slavery.

In my first article, (says Kretzmer) I described without proving it, that it [communism] is the separatist movement, whether in Quebec or in any other part of the world. As for Quebec separatists, I personally knew a member of the FLQ, Charles Gagnon, who had always been a communist. I don’t know what has become of him, because I lost touch with him ages ago.

There have been various separatist movements in Quebec, but I am going to focus above all, at first, on the RIN and its former President, the now deceased Pierre Bourgault. The anglophone reader or anyone who doesn’t know the history of Quebec will indeed be surprised by certain facts and certain declarations. That is expected, it’s normal.

All those organizations that mobilized the “Parti-Pris” and the “Révolution Québécoise” magazines as the front line of their advance, used the nationalism (including the respectable nationalism) of the French Canadians to launch the communist revolution in Quebec.

For these organizations, separatism – one should more properly say: “the tactic of independence” is only a means to their ends, a “Trojan horse” at the service of the aspirations of Moscow (or of Peking!) to a world hegemony. By way of illustration, let’s see what we can read on this subject in the September, 1964 issue of “Révolution Québécoise“:

“Just as every imperialist war must be transformed into a civil war to overthrow the power of the culpable ruling classes, in the same way EVERY nationalist movement must be transformed into a socialist movement to liberate the working classes” (page 35)

We know that excellent Christians have been deceived by the RIN-PQ-BQ* and their false gloss of patriotism. However, other than Mister Bourgault who repeated to all who would listen that an “independent” Quebec would be socialist, the apologia that one reads in the Marxist magazine “Révolution Québécoise,” as made by the RIN’s official publication, L’Indépendance (November 1964, p. 7), must provide sufficient reason to all true patriots and Christians of Quebec to oppose the PQ-BQ-RIN by total refusal, in both words and acts. Here is an excerpt from the official mouthpiece of the RIN, L’Indépendance (November 1964):

A new magazine just came out: “Révolution Québécoise,” run by Pierre Vallières (a former Felquist {FLQ terrorist), who left the team of “Cité Libre” – Pierre Elliot Trudeau was part of the team at Cité Libre – to participate in the building of a free city up to the measure of our era: the one that a (liberated!) Quebec will form tomorrow in which all property will be absolutely redistributed (!!). This magazine (Révolution Québécoise) is an addition to the several avant-garde magazines born in Québec the past few years, and must take its place on the bookshelf of every independentist whose heartfelt desire is to be informed on the economic and cultural problems of Québec.”

The official magazine of the RIN-PQ-BQ* thus suggests that every independentist read a review which is self-identified as communist-Leninist. It therefore seems futile to insist on pointing out, when it’s so easy to recognize, the ideology which has inspired the RIN-PQ-BQ each in its turn. However, it is necessary to return to the subject in order to examine, more closely this time, the RIN, the “Rassemblement Pour l’Indépendance Nationale” (the Rally for National Independence).

Pierre Bourgault, the former President of the RIN, toured Quebec. He was received officially in some towns, in some Catholic seminairies, and he even held public meetings in a well known Dominican monastery in Montreal. Here, then, is the gist of it.

The RIN and the Revolution

In its October 10th, 1964 edition, the Montreal daily newspaper “Le Devoir” published a long article on page 4 under “Reader’s Opinion” entitled: “The Independence of Quebec” (“L’indépendance du Québec”). This article permits us to trace the goals pursued by the RIN-PQ-BQ. To be clear, and to keep it short, we have taken the liberty of extracting only the most significant passages from this article. Here they are:

“Independentist parties and movements, which are proliferating in Québec, endorse opposing theories, according to which they describe themselves as left or right. Some of them claim to be the champions of independence; but in studying their writings we perceive that their real ultimate goal is revolution via the scientific socialism of Karl Marx. To drive us to this goal, they use as “research themes and as battle cries: socialism, secularism and independence”. I refer in particular to the magazines Parti-Pris and L’Indépendance, the latter being the official organ of the RIN.

In support of this grave accusation, here are a few typical excerpts, which are merely a fraction of those we could cite. A special edition of Parti-Pris was published on September 1st, 1964. The “manifesto” begins with a report of Marx on the Revolution; then, at page 12, we read:

“Independence, which was a goal, becomes a preliminary, a necessary step in the revolutionary conflict which exceeds it and amplifies it”.

We will see that the realness, the authenticity of the independentist idea resides in the political thought and practise of the Left.” (page 23)

IT WAS AT THE RIN THAT THE WORD “REVOLUTION” WAS FIRST DECLARED ITSELF”. (page 25)

“Trained in the school of Sartre, which is that of Marxism-Leninism, we are agreed upon the necessity to use, as research and battle themes, socialism, secularism and independence.” (p. 36).

“The recognition of the RIGHT to believe that religion is an evil” both follows and precedes the tirades of the priests.” (p. 30).

L’Indépendance – the magazine of the RIN, and Parti-Pris (2) get along very well, even if, for public consumption, they keep a certain distance between them. For example, in Parti-Pris the current President of the RIN, Mister Pierre Bourgault, published his political and electoral program on December 3rd, 1963. But, it is in the July 1964 issue of L’Indépendance at page 2, 2nd column, that we read:

“It is time to recall that independence is a means that must bring us to social and working-class revolution. The revolutionary party that achieves independence will, for example, abolish the two-party system…” (p. 6).

Then we will publicly recommend, and above all accomplish, the separation – the great work – of the spiritual from the temporal, of the Church from the State” (p. 2).”

This extract may seem long to some readers, but it was necessary. It reveals the communist parentage of the separatist movement in Québec and the place occupied within it by the RIN-PQ-BQ.

Tactics of the RIN

In December of 1964, Mr. Bourgault returned from a “thrilling tour” of Québec. That’s even the title of the article he wrote in RIN’s magazine that same month. In that article, he declared, most notably:

“Past violence is detrimental to our present action, and it is not in the name of principles that we denounce it, but in the name of efficiency.”

How do we interpret this? An about-face? A conversion?

No: because “past violence” is not denounced “in the name of principles”, which is to say in the name of the immutable commandments that come from God, or by reference to genuine ethics, but solely “in the name of efficiency.” Yesterday, violence might have been useful, today, No!! Because we [I mean, the RIN] ]have perceived that the Quebec people still have a solid ethical sense in this era, and that, accordingly, recourse to the mere idea of “violence” is unpopular. And on account of this, it undermines the work of the RIN. But tomorrow? Tomorrow, maybe, violence could be used. All depends on the greatest efficacy.

And then the bombs flew just about everywhere and we had the tragic murder of Pierre Laporte.

To show how well anchored was the thought of Mister Bourgault in the realm of the communist dialectic, it would be useful to quote two extracts from an article on “The True Nature of Communism” by Jean Daujat:

Jean Daujat“Most of our contemporaries,” writes Mr. Daujat, “have no idea how to react to communism because they don’t know it, which leads them into it, or allows them to be used by it. They are especially totally led astray by the perpetual contradictions of the communists, who often say and do the opposite today of what they said and and did the day before, which induces one and another to marvel at how they have changed their ways. This non-comprehension of Marxism has grave consequences …

” … Because, for such a philosophy (Marxist), the only consideration that counts is material power, efficacity; the only rule is to say or to do whatever the moment requires, more efficacious and more powerful. There is no place for truth, for good, or for justice to intervene.

Whatever a true communist says or writes is never the teaching of a truth, which is something that makes no sense to him, but propaganda to carry off an action: it will consist not in saying what is true, but whatever more efficiently serves the action to be exercised.

It is therefore absurd to say, as some do, that one can collaborate in an action practised by communists without adopting Marxist doctrine. Because communism is not at all the teaching of a doctrine, but the action exerted by the communist himself.” (Jean Daujat: The True Nature of Communism)

“Past violence is detrimental to our present action,” writes Mr. Bourgault, “and it is not in the name of principles that we denounce it, but in the name of efficiency.” This simple phrase can tell us a great deal about the philosophy of the separatist movement. Did not Lenin write: Marxism must take account of living reality, precise facts, and not cling to a theory of yesterday. Our doctrine is not a dogma, but a rule of action (Lenin, Works XXIV).

Who Was Pierre Bourgault?

In May of 1964, Mister Pierre Bourgault publicly confessed his agnosticism in MacLean’s Magazine (p. 44). He renewed this public confession on television networks; he reaffirmed it at Alma in Lake Saint-Jean to the regional press; and finally at Valleyfield over the airwaves of the local radio station.

During this interview granted to the Valleyfield press on November 17th, 1964, a journalist read to Mister Bourgault what the Vatican Council had ruled in respect to agnosticism:

“If someone says that the only true God, our Lord and Creator, is unknowable in the light of reason through the things he has made, that he be excommunicated.”

To which Mister Bourgault replied:

“I could be wicked and answer you like Jean-Paul Sartre: Je ne communias déjà plus!” [Literal translation: I will no longer take communion]

Let us not forget that one day or another, every man, every ideology, every social institution or human society must speak for or against the Church. The separatist movement chose its side and it has never sidetracked. Let’s re-read attentively the extract reported in L’Iindépendance (July 1964). The official mouthpiece of the RIN writes:

“Then we will publicly recommend, and above all accomplish, the separation – the great work – of the spiritual from the temporal, of the Church from the State” (p. 2) What are we to think?

The Christian citizen naturally knows that it is not society, but man, which has an immortal soul. It follows from that fact that society (along with its government) is made for man, and, that man is made for God. In this light, the suggestion of the separatist movement which says “publicly recommend, and above all accomplish, the separation – the great work – of the spiritual from the temporal, of the Church from the State” cannot but recall the famous statement of Lenin: “God is the personal enemy of communist society.”

To impose “the separation – the great work – of the spiritual from the temporal, of the Church from the State” upon a human society is at basis to compel a man practically to separate his body from his soul, because one is temporal and the other is spiritual! And it is not because they want to establish a simple distinction between the spiritual and the temporal, but they demand a great separation, a break, and “above all,” “to accomplish this” does not go without violence nor terrorism. Lenin made no effort to hide it when he said:

“Millions of excrements, defilements, violences, sicknesses, pestilences, are much less to be feared than the most subtle, the most refined, and the most invisible idea of God! God is the most personal enemy of Communist Society.”

The vehement opposition of Holy Pope Pius Xth to this doctrine is well explained thus:

“[translation of Kretzmer’s French:] that it is necessary to separate the Church from the State”, he wrote, “is an absolutely false thesis, a very pernicious error. Based, in effect, on this principle, that the State must recognize no religious practice, it is first of all gravely injurious for God; because the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and he maintains them in existence just as he does us. We owe him not only our private worship, but public and social honor.”

One thing must be clarified: secularism – or secular humanism – is a recognized religion according to a judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States. When the Liberals and the free-thinkers gild the pill for us, in speaking to us of pseudo-neutrality, they knowingly lie. Neutrality exists nowhere in the universe. These are the refrains of the Quebec Secular Movement which have given the order to the Governments of Quebec and of Canada to remove ancestral rights, rights conferred by the Constitution, concerning the teaching of Catholicism and Protestantism in Quebec schools.

The Quebec Secular Movement is also behind homosexual marriage or civil union. The Quebec Secular Movement is the true gouvernement du Québec, not the useless Quebec Legislature, stuffed with hypocrites who love to shake hands, appear in public and fly around in limousines.

The RIN, to give to its position the semblance of orthodoxy, readily spreads the idea among its members that it is necessary to liberate religion from politics; in fact, it proposed exactly the opposite: to “liberate” politics from religion! And that’s called secularism. But, secularism is a religion called Freemasonry.

“In the lives of states themselves,” writes Pope Pius XII in this regard, “the strength and the weakness of men, sin and grace, play a capital role. The politics of the 20th Century can’t ignore it, nor admit that one persists in the error of wanting to separate the state from religion in the name of a secularism that the facts have not been able to justify” (Christmas, 1956).

No! “The Catholic Church will never allow itself to be enclosed within the four walls of the temple! The separation of religion from life, and of the Church from the world, is contrary to Christian and Catholic doctrine!” (Pius XII).

It is therefore easy to see that the revolutionary doctrine of the separatist movement is “contrary to Christian and Catholic doctrine”; which is, because of this fact, “an absolutely false thesis, very gravely injurious for God, Creator of Man and founder of human societies”. And, it is rigorously logical to conclude that every devoted Catholic must make it his business to put his hatred for error and his love for truth into open battle in full light of day, against such an ideology!

I will conclude by reporting the public declaration (just one among many) of Mr. Bourgault, published in La Presse, of which he was then an Editor, on February 3rd, 1964 (page 17). It’s a report of a meeting held the previous evening of February 2nd at the Champagnat school.

“These cryptic zones proliferate, cryptics of centralization, of bilingualism, but also cryptics of betrayal, of intermediate bodies, of bishops and of embezzlers of public funds.”

Mister Bourgault thus quite simply lumps together the bishops and the embezzlers of public funds, which has nonetheless not prevented him from being received by certain of our Catholic colleges. The former president of the RIN was a man who disliked – as he readily admitted – mixing religion with politics, nor with his own life, yet he never shied away from vilifying the Church in its own public assemblies!

What is the real goal of the separatist movement?

 Pierre Bourgault (RIN)We have seen clearly, despite the distance these two movements prudently kept between them, (to assure the efficacy of their action upon the public) that the RIN closely pursued the same goals as the Marxist team of the Parti Pris.

“Seeking means capable of achieving the Revolution, Marx found misery”, wrote Rosenberg. Without a doubt, had he lived in Quebec in 1965, Marx would have found “independentism”. And the question returns: What is the real goal of the separatist movement?

The answer: “It is time to recall” as written in the July 1964 issue of L’Indépendance, “that independence is a means that must bring us to social and working-class revolution”.

And there it is. The real, the only, goal of the separatist movement! And it is not by chance that this is the goal of the World Communist Party: Stalin declared to the 7th world congress of the Comintern:

“All the detours, all the zigzags of our policy have but one goal and one goal only: world Revolution!”

Once again, it is clear that a true Catholic must not join the ranks of the separatist movement, if he really wishes to remain Catholic.

[Summarizing]: A Few Statements from the President of the RIN

With respect to the Quebec people:

“Give me 5% of the Quebec population, and I’ll take it where I want because the other 95% are sleeping.”

– Pierre Bourgault at Alma, in the church basement of St-Sacrement on November 2nd, 1964

“Despite history, despite English, despite the noteworthies, and a little bit also despite ourselves, alas!, the Quebecois people have stayed French. I had violently returned. This people had no need of directives to affirm its French pride in the face of the whole world”.

– Pierre Bourgault

Concerning terrorism:

“But, if Michelle Duclos preferred the cause of the blacks, I understand her. As for me, if I were a black, I would have long ago made them all jump”

– Pierre Bourgault, February 21st, 1965, Paul Sauvé Arena

Concerning social ethics:

“Past violence is detrimental to our present action, and it is not in the name of principles that we denounce it, but in the name of efficiency.”

– Pierre Bourgault in L’Indépendance December 1964

Concerning religion:

“I could be wicked and answer you like Jean-Paul Sartre: Je ne communias déjà plus!

– Pierre Bourgault in an interview taped on November 17th, 1964 at Valleyfield at the local radio station

Concerning his adversaries:

“These cryptic zones proliferate, cryptics of centralization, of bilingualism, but also cryptics of betrayal, of intermediate bodies, of bishops and of embezzlers of public funds.”

– Pierre Bourgault, 2 February 1964, Ecole Champagnat

“Because the truly socialist parties have never been able to seize power in any country whatsoever except in the course of a civil war”

– said “Parti-Pris“, coming to the point.

Let me say it again, clearly. “Parti-Pris” was a communist magazine. Moreover, they did not hide this and they wrote openly of it in their September 1964 edition:

“Marxism, to which we ascribe, is not a catechism, but above all, a method of analysis and of work required for us put it into operation in Québec.”

Which is why Mister Bourgault, past president of the RIN, published his “political and electoral programme” in a magazine which openly advertised itself as Marxist-Leninist.

This ideal of a break between the spiritual and the temporal is the core of the Revolution (with a capital “R”). It is very instructive to read what Stalin had to say in this regard:

In realizing such a separation (of Church and State) and in proclaiming freedom of religion, we have at the same time reserved to every citizen (read: to the Communist Party) the “right” to fight for this conviction through propaganda and through unrest… against all religion” (Voprosy, Leninism, Leningrad 1932, pp- 285-286).*

We are seeing it ever more clearly, the secessionist movement and the Communist Party are converging toward one and the same goal: the Revolution.

– 30 –
____________________

TRANSLATOR’S FOOTNOTES:

* Dr. John Laughland considers that the European Union essentially embodies Marxist ideology (“The European Union: a Marxist Utopia?“. Quebec “separatist” parties have, for decades, attempted not to “secede” by referendum, but to extract a mandate to negotiate the imposition on Quebec and on all of Canada of the EU system. The EU system therefore appears to be the veiled communist system, emerging progressively. The use of Quebec to force the system onto all of Canada would then result in a new Marxist “federal constitution, and a new Marxist constitution for Quebec”. See my blog post of 14 October 2009: “Sarkozy Scamming Quebec’s Hoodwinked Separatists“. KM/HCC.

* “PQ” is the acronym for Parti Québécois, a Quebec provincial “party” founded formally in 1968 by communist, René Lévesque (it was actually planned by others), and typically labeled “separatist” by press and media. However, “separatist” is a misnomer. The platform of the Parti Québécois has always been to impose the European system on all of Canada in place of Confederation. “Separatism” is merely a threat of UDI (unilateral declaration of independence) to destroy Canada, as blackmail to force the rest of Canada to accept the European system. Therefore, Mr. Kretzmer’s understanding of the Quebec Communist Party Manifesto appears to be on the right track: the attempt by Lévesque in 1980, and then by Jacques Parizeau in 1995 is to impose a new, ultimately “Marxist” Constitution on Quebec, and on all of Canada: the European Union system. A 1991 interview with Parizeau and then-Premier of Quebec Robert Bourassa shows that both are already quite conversant with the notion of a common North American Parliament. Bourassa, a “Liberal,” a label Canadians have been trained to identify as “fighting against separatists”, actually passed a law in 1991, Bill 150, compelling a referendum for Quebec to secede by a fixed date in 1992. That law, however, was blackmail to attempt to force all Canadians to accept so-called “amendments” to the federal Constitution presented as the Charlottetown Accord to “keep Quebec in Canada”. But, in reality, the proposed amendments were a ruse to appear to harmonize Canada with “international law” that emerged from the Badinter Commission during the overthrow and breakup of Yugoslavia. Had Charlottetown passed, Quebec would have “seceded” and used UDI to force the EU system on Canada. I wrote about this in my 2008 Federal Elections newsletter: “NO ONE TO VOTE FOR Federal Elections – Canada

When former Soviet dictator Mikhail Gorbachev visited Britain in 2000, he described the European Union as “the new European Soviet.” Others, including former Russian dissident Vladimir Bukovsky, American Charlotte Iserbyt and Lithuanian-American Vilius Brazenas, equate the EU system with the basis of a nascent world Soviet system. Still others identify the EU as being essentially Marxist in ideology (“The European Union: a Marxist Utopia?” by Dr. John Laughland, Online publication date: 2011-04-20).

* “BQ” is the acronym for Bloc Québécois, a so-called ‘federal’ ‘separatist’ party founded in approximately 1990 when a handful of mostly former Liberals and former Conservatives who had crossed the floor two to five months earlier to sit as independents, crossed the floor again inside Parliament to sit — we are told — as ‘separatists’. However, the agitations of this party since its founding have been designed to help get Quebec out of Confederation by intimidating Canadians into accepting the European system in lieu of threatened “break-up”. Again, it is a misnomer and thus misleading to call these parties “separatist”. They are not “separatist”. They are communist parties hiding behind separatist ideology.

Like the Parti Québécois, the Bloc Québécois wants a European-style union. Their recent past leader, Gilles Duceppe, admitted on camera on 30 April 2011 that he wants “a good constitution, like they have in Europe”. He wants a North American Union including a “sovereign” Quebec. In other words, the communists have targeted all of North America, and apparently they have counterparts in the U.S.A. who are ready and willing to give it to them, though this would necessitate the overthrow of the U.S. Constitution, Congress and the White House.

In this respect, it is worth noticing that there is a “secession” movement in the USA at precisely the same time that Duceppe is making this declaration. It is called the “Tenth Amendment Movement” by which 38+ States have filed formal declarations intending to ‘secede’ from their federal government and destroy the USA because of federal encroachment on States’ constitutional rights. I wrote about this in my blog post of 27 June 2011, “Taking America Down for Globalism in the Name of Patriotism

* “The official magazine of the RIN-PQ-BQ” — I now don’t know what Mr. Kretzmer means. “BQ” appears to refer to the Bloc Québécois which arrived on the scene as of 1990. The Bloc could therefore not have been involved in the 1960s with the RIN and the PQ. Was it a typographical error to have included the BQ in the Kretzmer article? Or does BQ stand for still something else that I’m not yet aware of?

Gilles Duceppe, recent former leader for over 20 years of the “separatist” Bloc Québécois (an illegal party in the federal Parliament) was a colleague of FLQ terrorist leader Charles Gagnon. Duceppe wrote for Gagnon’s communist magazine En Lutte ! (Struggle!). See my translation “Has the Far Left Hijacked the Quebec Sovereignty Movement?” under my general title: “Communist Links of the NDP and the Bloc Québécois”.

As Mr. Kretzmer notes above, Pierre Elliott Trudeau was part of the team at the magazine, Cité Libre. In fact, he was a co-founder of it with fellow Communist Gérard Pelletier. More importantly, Trudeau and other important federal figures in the “Quebec secession” scheme, including Gérard Pelletier, Jean Marchand, and René Lévesque, were also a part of the in-crowd at Cité Libre and, thereby, all were colleagues of BOTH of two major FLQ terrorist leaders, Pierre Vallières, who acted as Director of Cité Libre in the early 1960s around the time Vallières met Gagnon, who also worked at Cité Libre for Trudeau and Pelletier, and the FLQ bombings began in Quebec.

René Lévesque set up rather than founded the Parti Québécois, a fake “separatist” party designed to impose the EU system on Canada disguised as Quebec “sovereignty”, upon advice to do so from Trudeau, Pelletier, Marchand, and other federal ministers in the Lester Pearson Cabinet on a “secret committee” hosted in Montreal in the 1960s by Power Corporation of Canada. Power Corporation has a penchant for hiring communists, and I shall write a post on that another day.

René Lévesque, Fidel Castro, lawyer Raymond Daoust (1959) MontrealThe FLQ had been set up by Fidel Castro, who met Belgian immigrant to Montreal, Georges Schoeters during Castro’s visit to Canada on 26 April 1959. Castro later brought Schoeters to Cuba where he trained him to organize the FLQ. Castro also trained some of the terrorists handpicked by Schoeters. In the photo at left, we see René Lévesque, the year before he entered politics with the Liberals, interviewing Castro on the very same day that Castro linked up with Schoeters. FLQ terror would be the springboard and the pretext for a “political” settlement of the “complaints” of the FLQ about conditions in Quebec.

Had it been Lévesque who originated the idea of the “separatist” party which would fight it out with the rest of Canada in negotiations after a referendum, that would be sufficiently odd, given Lévesque’s link to the man who set up the FLQ in the first place: Castro. However, it was a group of mostly Liberals, federal ministers from Quebec in the government of Lester Pearson, who decreed that a “separatist” party should be erected. Those men included, notably, Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Gérard Pelletier and Jean Marchand, all three recruited by Pearson to “fight separatism”. But, strangely, the “separatist” party they decided should be set up to “fight separatism” in a referendum, actually had as its platform the “negotiation” of the European Economic Community (EU) system to replace Confederation. This is the very system viewed today as increasingly Soviet, and as Marxist in nature. Who would decree that a “separatist” party be set up so that “separatism” could be “fought” in a referendum? A secret committee of Power Corporation of Canada would, and did, in 1967, led by Claude Frenette, then-President of the Liberal Party, with close ties to Trudeau, and a Power Corp. executive and right-had man to Paul Desmarais, Sr. Power Corporation in 2010 is headquarters of the Rhodes Scholarships for Quebec (a free education in the pushing of world government). And more importantly, Power Corporation is a founding member of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives which authored the Building A North American Community report of 2005 outlining the creation of a North American Community on the pretext of the September 11th, 2001 “terrorist attacks”, and published by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the U.S. branch of the network involved in the Cecil Rhodes society, and whose “sister institute” in Canada is the Canadian International Council (CIC), on whose Board and Senate we find Power Corporation.

Again, despite the steadfast complicity of press and media pretending that Quebec, led by “separatists,” was attempting to “secede,” the real subject of the referendum was not secession, but the imposition on all of Canada of the EU system. René Lévesque ultimately “founded” that “separatist” party, the Parti Québécois, which has been used ever since to attempt to force the European Union system onto Canada in place of Confederation.

Castro’s trip to Montreal on 26 April 1959 (when he connected with Schoeters) was organized by Raymond Daoust, a criminal lawyer, according to the caption under the same photo (above) in a biography entitled René Lévesque – Un enfant du siècle 1922-1960, by Pierre Godin. It is unclear whether Daoust was working for the mafia at that time; however, Daoust is ultimately identified as a lawyer for the Vic Cotroni mafia family and also in circumstances suggesting that he, himself, was a part of the mob. In 1963, when twenty-three FLQ terrorists were picked up and charged, some of them, including Raymond Villeneuve, hired criminal lawyer Daoust to conduct their defense. It is therefore quite odd that Daoust should have organized Castro’s trip to Montreal on the very day in 1959 when Castro connected with Schoeters, who was used to set up the Front de Libération du Québec (FLQ) terrorists; and that Daoust himself, three or four years later – at which date he is known as a lawyer for Cotroni – would end up defending some of the terrorists, one of whose leaders – Pierre Vallières, is a colleague of Trudeau, and of the two other man recruited by Lester Pearson to join the Liberals to “fight” these same terrorists whom they call “separatists” …. although, they are clearly not “separatists” but communists. And in the process of “fighting” them, he, Trudeau, the defender of Canada, will facilitate their attempted imposition of what is apparently the economic basis of a world-wide communist system: for the 1980 referendum proposes to replace Confederation with the European Economic Community system, which today we see as the European Union with special status at the U.N.

KM/HCC
Saturday, 3 September 2011 9:42 a.m.
Republished on Sunday, 22 April 2012 in “No Snow in Moscow”, WordPress.