For those of you interested in the Communist infiltration of the Catholic Church, have a look at the following pair of related posts:
The Son of a Canadian General of WWII
Gave Military Aid to Fidel Castro for the Cuban Revolution
A. R. L. (Andy) McNaughton, a Montreal consulting engineer, and the son of Canadian-born General Andrew George Latta McNaughton, ran guns for Fidel Castro, acted as Castro’s double agent, and fought in Cuba at the side of Castro and his rebels during the Revolution.
Speaking of McNaughton’s father, the General, The Canadian Encyclopedia says the General “endorsed the ill-fated DIEPPE plan”. Further on, the CE says:
“A compelling public figure for almost 2 decades after 1945, [General] McNaughton was Canadian representative on the UN Atomic Energy Commission, and president of the Atomic Energy Control Board of Canada, 1946-48; permanent delegate to the UN, 1948-49“.
From what I have read, only Rhodes Scholars and leftists end up representing Canada at the UN, so this General being appointed as a “permanent delegate to the UN” does raise a question of leftist leanings, in my mind.
The name of the son, A. R. L. (Andy) McNaughton, comes up linked to Castro in news clippings in 1959, including The New York Times (January 6, 1959) and the Montreal Gazette (Monday, April 27, 1959).
The Montreal Gazette’s Bill Bantey described Fidel Castro’s Montreal visit on April 26th, 1959 for the front page of the Gazette:
With Castro as he flew here from Boston — three hours behind schedule — was a party of some 75 Cuban government officials and newspapermen.
Among those greeting the lawyer who toppled the dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista was Andrew R. L. (Andy) McNaughton, a Montrealer who helped secure arms for the rebels during the uprising.
A smattering of newsclips from Castro’s 1959 visit to Canada helps to set the atmosphere:
Someone at typepad.com, an author, a blogger? by the name of Isabel Vincent (seems to be bilingual) has this to say about the General’s son:
“The rebels’ idealism also transcended borders as people from around the world rallied to their cause. Canadian Andy McNaughton, son of the famed Gen. A.G.L. McNaughton, was a case in point. McNaughton’s [son] worked for Castro as a double agent during the guerrilla war, in which he was code-named Esquimal, or “man from the north.” Officially employed as an arms buyer for Batista, he purchased weapons for the rebels with the Cuban regime’s money, as Canadian historian Robert Wright relates in his 2007 book Three Nights in Havana: Pierre Trudeau, Fidel Castro and the Cold War World. McNaughton, named an honorary citizen of Cuba after the revolution, told the Canadian press in 1959 that “I got to know [Cubans’] problems. You can’t close your eyes to some things. You have to make your decision and I made mine—to help the cause of freedom in Cuba.” [I accessed that passage on 23 February 2009 at quarter past midnight.]
Castro also connected with Belgian immigrant to Montreal, Georges Schoeters (a teaching assistant and a student at the French University of Montreal), alleged by some to have been a KGB agent. (I’m currently working on newer, contemporary research that shows a different inspiration for Schoeters and his terrorism: “the Red Priest”, François Houtart, a Marxist Jesuit (oxymorn), had known Schoeters in a Young Christian Workers’ residence in Belgium. There will be a post on that, eventually.)
Through Schoeters, to whom Castro gave aid and training in Cuba, the Communist Front de libération du Québec (FLQ) terrorists were set up. Their bombing spree began in early 1963. In his book, La Crise d’Octobre [The October Crisis] (written while occupying high office in Canada), Trudeau’s compadre, Communist Gérard Pelletier, admitted that the FLQ terrorists (whose logo was a gun-toting, pipe-smoking “patriote” [patriot] from the 1839 local “revolutions”), declared:
“that the Front de liberation du Québec has been gestating in that province for eight years, that it is a tool of the Communist Party, that none of the electronic equipment it has stolen since 1965 has ever been recovered, that it has “little concern for Québec nationalism despite its propaganda,” and links it to collateral red front groups such as the Front de libération populaire (People’s Liberation Front), and the Mouvement Syndicale Politique (Trade Union Political Movement).”
As I previously commented in my translation entitled “The Plan for Quebec: Communist State?” (NoSnow, April 22, 2012):
“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 the (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 men 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.”
Moreover, René Lévesque, a former war correspondent and a journalist in Montreal at the time of the 1959 Castro visit, was photographed interviewing Castro. In 1964, Lévesque told high school children, on at least two occasions, that they should resort to “guns and dynamite” if “Canada” refused to give Quebec “Associate State” status (modeled on the European system, the system of the globalists, transitional to one-world government) instead of Confederation. In 2002, Mikhail Gorbachev called that system the “New European Soviet”.While Castro was in town, he was accompanied by Montreal criminal lawyer, Raymond Daoust, later better known as a mob lawyer for the Cotroni clan. (The Cotronis were fans of the Liberals. They attended Liberal conventions; and their thugs occasionally showed up at polling booths with baseball bats, to stuff the ballot boxes. The Cotronis apparently offered to locate the kidnapped Labor Minister, Pierre Laporte, an offer declined by Liberal Quebec Premier and Rhodes Scholar, Robert Bourassa.)
Canada’s “Red Fed” Pampers the Terrorists
Peter Dauphin of the Edmund Burke Society wrote a couple of pieces in 1971 documenting the fact that known FLQ terrorists and other assorted subversives were being coddled by the Trudeau régime. The regime illegally funneled Canadian taxpayers’ money to the terrorists, supplying them with paid “volunteer” jobs, office equipment, and cash for National Defence ads in pro-Communist magazines.
The program used as the conduit was called the Company of Young Canadians (CYC); which had in fact been set up by (now known-to-be) Soviet agent, Prime Minister Lester Bowles Pearson. Obviously, the program would have allowed Soviet Pearson and then his “three wise men” from the Quebec Left (Trudeau, Pelletier and Jean Marchand) to stay in touch with the Communist subversives, while supplying them with perks and wages to float their terrorism.
Dauphin’s first piece on the subject is in particular worth reading:
Part 2 is here, The Pelletier Crisis by Peter Dauphin.And all of this emerges from a visit by Fidel Castro to Montreal in 1959, following a successful military campaign in Cuba aided by the son of a WWII Canadian General, who is later linked to the Communist UN. General McNaughton had been so close to MacKenzie-King (the latter a protégé of the same Rockefellers who co-financed the mass-slaughter of the Russian people by the Bolshevik Jews in 1917) that King wanted to make General McNaughton the first Canadian-born Governor General of Canada.
I repeat, the son of a WWII Canadian General, supplied arms to Fidel Castro, resulting in the Communist overthrow of Cuba.
Castro then set up the Communist FLQ terrorists to aid in the overthrow of Canada.
The Red Terror in Canada gave the more elite moles a pretext to propose a “non-violent” “political,” “democratic,” “solution” to the terror (misportrayed as an ethnic war between the French Canadians and the “rest of Canada”), by instructing René Lévesque to set up the (Communist) Parti Québécois to run referendums to dismantle Canada. I’ll go into this particular background in a separate post on “The Secret Committee of Power”, from a book by “former” Marxist-Leninist leader, Jean-François Lisée.
It all appears to be a very tightly knit family: the mob, the Liberals, terrorism, politics, Soviet moles, lawyers both criminal and constitutional, and Soviet Communism.
The Daughter of a Canadian Major in WWII was an FLQ Terrorist who gave Explosives to a Communist-influenced Black Liberation Front to Blow up the Statue of Liberty
The exploits of Michèle Duclos, the RIN, the Black Liberation Front and the F.L.Q. are described in Chapter 7 (Le F.L.Q. et les Noirs américains) [“The FLQ and the American Blacks”] of Louis Fournier’s 1982 book, F.L.Q. Histoire d’un mouvement clandestin [F.L.Q. History of an Underground Movement].
Fournier is a journalist specialized in Quebec trade-unionism (“journaliste spécialisé dans le syndicalisme québécois“). Quebec trade-unionism is on the left. Mr. Fournier is also apparently on the left; but he is also a trained research journalist with degrees from the French University of Montreal and from Strasbourg University in France. Therefore, some of his information is useful.
Mr. Fournier’s partisanship is evident at the time of the October Crisis (during the kidnapping of British Trade Commissioner James Cross and Quebec Labor Minister Pierre Laporte). Fournier, then a journalist with radio station CKAC, became the first to broadcast the F.L.Q. Manifesto. His initiative got him arrested by the Police. Fournier is therefore not only a journalist, but a man in the midst of the action. He refers to the F.L.Q. terrorists as “political prisoners”.
I’ll translate a bit on Michèle Duclos from Fournier’s pages 93-95.
De 65 à 68, les grandes émeutes urbaines feront 215 morts et plus de 9 000 blessés). Le 15 février, le leader du mouvement noir radical, Malcolm X, est assassiné à Harlem lors d’un ralliement de l’Organisation pour l’unité afro-américaine. Le FBI ne serait pas étranger à ce meurtre.
From 1965-1968, the great urban riots left 215 dead and over 9,000 wounded. On February 15th , the leader of the radical Black movement, Malcolm X, is assassinated in Harlem during a rally of the Organization for Afro-American Unity. The FBI would be no stranger to this murder.
C’est dans ce climat agité qu’on apprend l’existence de liens entre le F.L.Q. et un mouvement clandestin de Noirs américains, le Black Liberation Front. Le 16 février, le FBI appréhende à New York une Québécoise que la police fédérale américaine relie à un complot terroriste en vue de dynamiter des monuments historiques aux Etats-Unis, dont la célèbre statue de la Liberté. Michèle Duclos, 26 ans, est arrêtée à Manhattan où elle s’était rendue livrer de la dynamite qu’elle avait transportée en voiture depuis Montréal.
It is in this agitated climate that news emerges of the existence of links between the F.L.Q. and an underground movement of American Blacks, the Black Liberation Front. On February 16th, the FBI arrests a French-Canadian in New York whom the American federal police link to a terrorist plot to dynamite historic monuments in the USA, including the famous Statue of Liberty. Michèle Duclos, aged 26, is arrested in Manhattan, where she had gone to deliver the dynamite she had brought by car from Montreal.
Mme Duclos est une figure bien connue dans la métropole où elle a travaillé comme speakerine à la télévision. C’est la fille du major Jean Duclos du Régiment des Fusiliers Mont-Royal, un héros du débarquement des Canadiens français à Dieppe en Normandie. Militante en vue du R.I.N., elle a travaillé au secrétariat du parti durant six mois, en 1964, à titre de secrétaire personnelle de Pierre Bourgault.
Madam Duclos is a figure well known in the city (of Montreal) where she has worked as a television speaker. She is the daughter of Major Jean Duclos of the Mount-Royal Fusileers Regiment, a hero of the French-Canadian landing at DIEPPE and at Normandy. A militant with the RIN, she worked in the party’s secretariat for six months in 1964, as personal secretary to Pierre Bourgault.
A New York, le FBI épingle du même coup trois militants du Black Libération Front, Robert Collier, Walter Bowe et Khaleel Sayyed. A Montréal, la G.R.C. arrête quatre membres du R.I.N. : Michèle Saulnier, 31 ans, professeur de psycho-pédagogie à l’Ecole normale Jacques-Cartier, liée au groupe Parti Pris; Gilles Legault, un mécanicien de 31 ans militant de la première heure du R.I.N. où il est président de l’association du comté de Laurier, et deux jeunes travailleurs, Raymond Sabourin, 21 ans, employé de banque, et Jean Giroux, 20 ans, commis des Postes canadiennes. Un autre jeune militant du R.I.N., François Dorlot, étudiant en Droit à l’Université de Montréal, est détenu pour interrogatoire.
In New York, the FBI nabs three Black Liberation Front militants in a single strike, Robert Collier, Walter Bowe and Khaleel Sayyed. In Montreal, the R.C.M.P. arrest four members of the R.I.N.: Michèle Saulnier, aged 31, a teacher in psycho-education at the Ecole normale Jacques-Cartier, linked to the Parti Pris group; Gilles Legault, a mechanic aged 31 and an activist from the very beginning of the R.I.N. of whose Laurier County association he is the president; and two young workers, Raymond Sabourin aged 21, a bank employee; and Jean Giroux, aged 20, a clerk with Canada Post. Another young RIN militant, François Dorlot, a law student at the University of Montreal, is detained for questioning.
Le directeur du FBI lui-même, Edgar Hoover, annonce que le groupe sera accusé de conspiration pour dynamitage. Il révèle que le leader du Black Liberation Front, Robert Collier, a déjà séjourné à deux reprises à Cuba où il a rencontré Ernesto Che Guevara. C’est à La Havane que Collier a connu, lors d’un voyage à l’été 1964, le professeur Michèle Saulnier, qui serait son «contact» à Montréal. Il l’a revue dans la métropole à la fin de janvier 1965 alors qu’elle était en compagnie de Michèle Duclos. Celle-ci a également des relations avec des milieux officiels cubains, à Montréal et à New York, et des liens avec le F.L.N. algérien depuis qu’elle a travaillé pour l’Office national du tourisme à Alger.
The Director of the FBI himself, Edgar Hoover, announces that the group will be charged with conspiracy to dynamite. He reveals that the leader of the Black Liberation Front, Robert Collier, had already been to Cuba twice where he met Ernesto Che Guevara. It is in Havana, during a trip in the summer of 1964, that Collier met Michèle Saulnier, who would be his contact in Montreal. He saw her again in the city at the end of January 1965 when she was in the company of Michèle Duclos. The latter also had connections to official Cuban circles, in Montreal and in New York, as well as ties to the Algerian F.L.N. from the time she worked for the National Tourism Office in Algeria.
Un agent infiltré du FBI
An Infiltrated FBI Agent
C’est grâce à un agent secret infiltré au sein du Black Liberation Front, le sergent noir Raymond Wood, que le FBI a pu obtenir ces renseignements et éventer le présumé complot de dynamitage. Wood a même accompagné Collier à Montréal lors de la rencontre avec Saulnier et Duclos. Le groupe a été pris en filature par la G.R.C. à la demande du FBI. L’enquête s’est poursuivie dans la métropole sous la direction du sergent Gérard Barbeau de la G.R.C, assisté du sergent-détective Claude Désautels de l’escouade antiterroriste de Montréal. C’est ainsi que la police a remonté la filière de la fourniture d’explosifs.
It is thanks to a secret agent infiltrated into the Black Liberation Front, the Black Sergeant Raymond Wood, that the FBI was able to obtain this information and break up the presumed dynamiting conspiracy. Wood even accompanied Collier to Montreal during his meeting with Saulnier and Duclos. The group had been tailed by the RCMP at the request of the FBI. The investigation was pursued in the city under the direction of Sergeant Gérard Barbeau of the RCMP, assisted by Sergeant-Detective Claude Désautels of the Montreal anti-terrorist squad. Which is how the police had set up the tail from the explosives supplier.
En réalité, lors des audiences du comité sénatorial américain sur le terrorisme en 1973-1974, on révélera que le soi-disant complot avait été tramé à l’initiative même du FBI et que c’était un coup monté. Le policier Wood jouait le rôle d’agent provocateur. De surcroît, à la suite d’une entente FBI-G.R.C, un militant du F.L.Q. aurait été « manipulé » par la G.R.C. pour l’opération d’approvisionnement en dynamite 21.
In reality, during hearings of the American Senatorial Committee on Terrorism in 1973-74, it was revealed that the so-called plot had been framed at the initiative of the FBI itself, and that it was a staged sting. Police officer Wood played the role of agent provocateur. On top of it, further to an FBI-RCMP agreement, an FLQ militant had been “manipulated” by the RCMP for the dynamite supply operation 21
Quoi qu’il en soit, l’affaire aura un grand retentissement au Québec et aux Etats-Unis. Les trois militants noirs seront condamnés à 10 ans de prison. Quant à Michèle Duclos, elle se reconnaît coupable de contrebande d’explosifs et, par suite de cet aveu, on retire le second chef d’accusation, celui de conspiration contre la propriété fédérale des Etats-Unis. Le 16 juin, elle est condamnée à cinq ans de prison mais sa peine est révisée au bout de trois mois et commuée en sursis. Libérée après sept mois d’incarcération, interdite de séjour aux Etats-Unis et risquant sinon d’être inculpée, du moins de devoir témoigner devant les tribunaux québécois, elle part en exil. Après un séjour en France, elle ira au Liban pour travailler à la télévision de Beyrouth. Michèle Duclos ne rentrera au Québec qu’après huit ans d’exil, en février 1973. « Il n’y a aucun doute dans mon esprit que nous aurons notre indépendance », dira-t-elle à son retour.
Be that as it may, the affair had a big impact in Quebec and the United States. The three black militants will be sentenced to 10 years in prison. As for Michèle Duclos, she pleaded guilty to smuggling explosives and, on account of this, the second charge, that of conspiracy against federal property of the USA was withdrawn. On June 16th, she was sentenced to five years in prison but her punishment was revised after three months and commuted to a reprieve. Released after seven months of incarceration, banned from remaining in the USA or risk being further charged, at the least having to testify in Quebec courts, she went into exile. After a stay in France, she left for Lebanon to work in television in Beirut. Michèle Duclos would not return to Quebec until February 1973, after eight years of exile. “There is no doubt in my mind that we will have our independence”, she said upon her return.
In addition, according to Louis Fournier, there is a communist cell of the FLQ called DIEPPE. The reason might be intriguing to know, since Lieutenant-General Andrew George Latta McNaughton and Major Jean Duclos were both instrumental at Dieppe, and both produced children who aided Communist terrorism.
– 30 –
Foreword: This post was in this web site, but has disappeared. I still have it in my backup site in localhost, so I’m putting it up again. Exclusive English translation for “No Snow In Moscow”:
Original French Title: “PARTI COMMUNISTE” [COMMUNIST PARTY] by Éric Duhaime
Original publication and date: Le Journal de Québec, 15 August 2011
A mega-gathering of the radical left will be held this weekend in St-Alphonse-de-Rodriguez, in Lanaudière [Quebec, Canada]. The “17th Alternative Days 2011” presents a shocking program of events.
On the menu, presentations by our local Left, from new president of the CSN, Louis Roy, to the leader of “Project Montreal”, Richard Bergeron, by way of New Democratic [NDP] Neo-MP, Alexander Boulerice, not to forget the representatives of United Quebec, the FTQ and other labour unions.
AS IN CUBA?
What is shocking about this conference on “human rights” is the presence of Leonel Gonzales, coordinator of international relations for the Parliament of Cuba, and Theresita Sotolongo Vicente, Cuba’s Ambassador to Canada.
Guest speaker Gonzalez is former Director of the Workers Central of Cuba, a puppet organization which holds the monopoly over representation of Cuban workers.
Cuba does not recognize the right to collective bargaining, nor to strike. Movements of the self-employed are illegal. The true union leaders are thrown into prison, persecuted, or worse, confined in secret.
Rather than reporting these excesses, the Quebec Left invites the autocrats of the regime to join them in denouncing capitalism, and to sing the communist International under the supervision of Castro’s representative in Canada.
THREE CHEERS FOR CHAVEZ?
That’s not all. The Leftist activists will also listen to Noel Marquez of the Council of Social Movements of ALBA, an organization created by Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro to broadcast their death-to-liberty ideology in Latin America, and which maintains links with terrorist Marxist groups such as FARC and the Shining Path.
A journalist-student of the Prince Arthur Herald of McGill University moreover revealed last week that the Bolivarian Society of Quebec, a local branch of sympathizers with dictators, holds its regular meetings at the CSN in Montreal.
With their communist comrades, our union activists shut their eyes to abuses of the rights of workers.
I am not alone in denouncing Cuban and Venezuelan anti-trade-unionism; so does the Confederation of International Trade Unions (CSI) of which the CSN is however a member!
This gathering of communists and of devils’ advocates for the worst dictatorships is organized by International Alternatives, the same organism which financed the Canadian ship for Gaza which never left the Greek islands.
Another workshop of the weekend is called “Against Harper”. If they were consistent, our Leftist friends would also denounce the “subsidies of Harper”.
In recent years, the Federal Government [of Canada] has contributed over 5 million dollars to “Alternatives” under the rubric of — hang onto your seats — “democratic partners”. The Quebec Governement added 1.8 million dollars. And that’s without counting projects currently underway which are costing the Federal Government $769,828 and the Quebec Government $541,340.
And thus our taxes are squandered to fight our democratic and union rights.
Unionized workers, how do you feel about your obligatory union dues being spent to bring in representatives of the torturers of Latin-american trade unionists?
We knew the Quebec Left was against freedom of association for workers. When it participates in circuses like this one organized by “Alternatives”, we must admit that it is against freedom, period.
Got the following message from Archive.org re this French post: “This URL has been excluded from the Wayback Machine.”
It’s therefore doubly fortunate that I saved the whole French text in 2011. See below.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
TEXT OF FRENCH ORIGINAL:
Un méga-rassemblement de la gauche radicale se tiendra ce week-end à St-Alphonse-de-Rodriguez, dans Lanaudière. Les 17e journées alternatives 2011 proposent une programmation qui étonne.
Au menu, des intervention de notre gauche locale, du nouveau président de la CSN, Louis Roy, au chef de Projet Montréal, Richard Bergeron, en passant par le néo-député néo-démocrate Alexandre Boulerice, sans oublier les représentants de Québec solidaire, de la FTQ et des autres syndicats.
COMME À CUBA?
Ce qui choque dans cette conférence sur les droits de la personne, c’est la présence de Leonel Gonzales, coordonnateur des relations internationales du parlement de Cuba et de Theresita Sotolongo Vicente, ambassadrice de Cuba au Canada.
Le conférencier Gonzalez est l’ancien directeur de la Centrale des travailleurs de Cuba, organisation fantoche qui détient le monopole de représentation des travailleurs cubains.
Cuba ne reconnait pas le droit aux négociations collectives, ni à la grève. Les mouvements de travailleurs indépendants sont illégaux. Les vrais leaders syndicaux sont jetés en prison, persécutés ou, au mieux, confinés à la clandestinité.
Plutôt que de dénoncer ces excès, la gauche québécoise invite des autocrates du régime pour dénoncer, avec eux, le capitalisme et chanter l’international communiste, sous la tutelle de la représentante de Castro au Canada.
Ce n’est pas tout. Les activistes gauchistes écouteront aussi Noel Marquez du Conseil des mouvements sociaux de l’ALBA, une organisation créée par Hugo Chavez et Fidel Castro pour diffuser leur idéologie liberticide en Amérique latine, qui entretient des liens avec des groupes terroristes marxistes comme les FARC ou le Sentier Lumineux.
Un journaliste-étudiant du Prince Arthur Herald de l’Université McGill révélait d’ailleurs la semaine dernière que la Société bolivarienne du Québec, une antenne locale des sympathisants de ces dictateurs, tient ses réunions à la permanence de la CSN à Montréal.
Avec les camarades communistes, nos syndicalistes ferment les yeux sur les abus des droits des travailleurs.
C’est pas juste moi qui dénonce l’anti-syndicalisme cubain et vénézuélien mais aussi la Confédération syndicale internationale (CSI) dont est pourtant membre… la CSN!
Ce rassemblement de communistes et de suppôts des pires dictatures est organisé par Alternatives Internationales, même organisme qui finançait cet été le bateau canadien pour Gaza qui n’a jamais quitté les îles grecques.
Un autre atelier du week-end s’intitule « Contre Harper ». S’ils étaient conséquents pour deux cents, nos amis gauchistes s’élèveraient aussi contre les subventions d’Harper.
Le gouvernement fédéral a versé, ces dernières années, plus de 5 millions $ à Alternatives à titre de, tenez-vous bien, « partenaire démocratique ». Le gouvernement québécois ajoutait 1,8 millions $. Sans compter les projets présentement en cours qui s’élèvent à 769,828$ avec le fédéral et 541,340$ avec Québec.
Notre argent dilapidée à combattre nos droits démocratiques et syndicaux.
Comment trouvez-vous ça, travailleurs syndiqués, de payer des cotisations obligatoires pour inviter les représentants des tortionnaires d’organisations syndicales latino-américaines?
On savait la gauche québécoise contre la liberté d’association des travailleurs. Lorsqu’elle participe à des cirques comme celui d’Alternatives, on doit constater qu’elle est contre la liberté tout court.
KM/HCC 1 September 2011
“I am taken captive, and I know not by whom, but I am taken.”
“Marx hardly dealt with the concept of nationalism at all and discounted it as a major force. Lenin recognized it to be tactically useful in a revolution, but of no use after that.”
— Robert R. King in Minorities Under Communism, (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973), p. 14.
“Secret Committee” “of Power” Independently Confirmed
Quebec author Robin Philpot, a faithful chorister of the New World Order in Quebec (who pretends to expose it while concealing it with the usual canards), nonetheless furnishes added detail on the secret committee at Power Corporation in his 2014 update of his 2008 book, [translation] Behind The Desmarais State: Power. Philpot is one of the many authors of Le Goût du Québec, L’après référendum 1995 (a lament for the near-miss Soviet takeover of 1995). See my post Singing Tomorrows.
The secret committee at Power was first exposed by tactical advisor to the Communist Parti Québécois, “former Marxist-Leninist leader” Jean-François Lisée in his 1990 book In The Eye of the Eagle. Lisée’s end-notes, however, leave much to the imagination. Documents behind his account of the secret committee are too vaguely referenced to easily identify them in a search for the originals. Philpot has resolved that problem by giving us the title and date of the relevant dispatch by American “diplomat”, E.C. Bittner (who may have been under cover in Ottawa for the CIA), both of which were omitted by Lisée: “Quebec Separatism and the Liberal Leadership Race”, (3 January 1968).
You can read my exclusive English translation of a segment of that free Introduction: “Behind The Desmarais State: Power” which confirms the 1967 “secret committee” at Power Corporation. The secret committee, including Pierre Elliott Trudeau, called for the Communist Parti Québécois to be set up and led by Communist René Lévesque. If the communism isn’t immediately obvious, it’s the communism of the New Left called “Industrial Democracy,” first trotted out in Yugoslavia under Marshal Tito in 1950, and touted by Leo Roback in 1970 as “the true heir of Karl Marx”.
<h2 style="text-align:center;padding-bottom:9px;padding-top:12px;"“Power” Made René Lévesque A Star
Philpot — as I said, a faithful chorister to the New world Order — claims Power Corporation intended to “marginalize” René Lévesque and “beat” “separatism”. In fact, Power Corporation and the federal Liberals upgraded Lévesque and gave him a new political party to lead.
What Philpot, and Lisée as well, don’t want readers to see is that Power Corporation built its own “separatist” movement using Lévesque to merge the existing Red, Pink and Bourgeois parties. Is that “marginalizing”? Is that “beating” “separatism”? No. They made Lévesque a star. Their star. And that is the secret. Big Business, what Professor Antony Sutton called the “corporate socialists”, created the Parti Québécois to restructure Canada and North America to suit their design for the new global world.
So to counter these obvious facts in the segment Philpot has to quote in order to write his political pot-boiler — funded by tax dollars by the way — Philpot notes that René Lévesque and Jacques Parizeau alone in Quebec politics (respectively the leaders of the 1980 and 1995 referendums) had no “links” with the Desmarais.
But of course they did! They were secret agents of Desmarais who set up the Communist PQ for them; who ran two referendums for them. Publicly, they had to dress down Power Corporation. Ties between them would not have fit with the illusion of Desmarais “opposing” “separatism”. — which is how our corrupt and dumbed-down press and media represent Power Corporation, as being opposed to Quebec “sovereignty” — when in fact Power Corporation is one of the globalist authors of the means toward dismantling the whole of Canada by secession: the invention and set-up of the PQ itself through the “secret committee” hosted on its business premises.
The Power-controlled PQ used “separatism” to swell its ranks; yet, when referendum time arrived, both Lévesque and Parizeau switched from “sovereignty” (independence for Quebec) to “association” or “partnership”: and that is where the wanted “negotiation” lies: the “negotiation” by Canada’s federal government (also controlled by Power Corporation) on behalf of the “rest of Canada” with Power-controlled Quebec after a “Yes” in a referendum to secede. In other words, Canada will “negotiate” its own suicide. The treacherous multinational corporations don’t want to be blamed for that, but they plan to be the beneficiaries of this corporate coup on Canada and the West.
Philpot tells us that Power controlled Trudeau and put him in office, and also Chrétien, Paul Martin, Stephen Harper and Brian Mulroney. Naturally: because any of these men might have been called upon to “negotiate” the dismantling of Canada — its re-federation — with Power’s Communist PQ after a “Yes” in a rigged referendum. (I’m very sure the 1995 referendum was highly rigged; and quite possibly, also the one in 1980.)
René Lévesque and Jacques Parizeau had to keep their distance from Power Corporation. They had to find fault with it or threaten it or denounce Power Corporation to create the impression of distance.
Lévesque denounced Power Corporation expressly in the PQ’s 1972 Communist manifesto (free download in the sidebar, see the blue lightning). At page 68, Lévesque (and his gang) said:
“Conversely, there are nonetheless a number of sectors where indefinite growth in the size of companies hardly presents any true advantages. The economic utility of conglomerates (or “empires”) is perhaps obvious for the financiers who constituted them, but not for the community. All in all, the fact that one must be satisfied with only one steel-works does not extend absolutely to justifying at the same time the existence of Power Corporation!”
Lévesque is threatening to break up Power Corporation … if Quebec becomes “sovereign”, i.e. Communist.
But you will notice that despite the big send-up that Philpot gives to the “threat” posed to Quebec by this corporate Godzilla, and the self-serving complaints about “monopoly” aired so indignantly by Philpot: no Liberal government, no federal government, and certainly no Parti Québécois government, has ever dismantled Power Corporation.
Therefore, if you want to know who runs Quebec and Canada, look not to the Legislature, not to Parliament, look to Power Corporation. How else can one explain that for over 50 years, nothing has been done about it? Power is untouchable. Because Power is the boss … of political puppets and phony referendums to use the people in a “democratic” vote to cover for their lackeys when they take the country apart.
Proof that René Lévesque was working for Power Corporation is the fight he always had on his hands from the PQ militants who did not like the word “association” in Lévesque’s platform. Lévesque finally resigned, leaving Parizeau to tactically rescue the PQ as its new leader by publicly denouncing “association”, just like the rest of the Reds.
But at referendum time, Parizeau, with the aid of his fellow ball players, jumped back to the scheme that calls for “negotiation”: he now called it “partnership” instead of “association”. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
René Lévesque includes a timeline at the back of his 1986 Memoirs entitled Attendez que je me rappelle… (Wait while I remember…), republished in 1994 by Québec/Amérique. The recurring crisis in the party over the concept of association is noted on the timeline. I’ve extracted the points, as follows:
- “October  In a statement to the (Quebec) National Assembly, René Lévesque stresses that sovereignty and association form a whole.”
- “June  Seventh Congress of the Parti Québécois. Party members support the position of René Lévesque on the link between sovereignty and association.”
- “May  Referendum. The “No” takes it with 59.6%, and 44.4% for the “Yes”. The rate of participation is 86%. The “Yes” takes a majority in 16 of the 110 voting districts.”
- “3-6 December  Congress of the Parti Québécois: hard-lining of the party, a majority of the delegates excludes from the party program all reference to association. René Lévesque threatens to resign.”
Think carefully: René Lévesque threatened to quit over the word “association”. Why? Because, without the word “association,” the whole concept of «état-associé» (the EEC-EU-EUSR for Canada–and next, North America) vanishes. It is the word “association” which will transform the top half of the continent of North America, instantaneously, into a North American (Soviet) Union disguised as “keeping Quebec in Canada”.
Again, why did René Lévesque threaten to resign over deletion of the word association? Because he was working for Power Corporation; he was leading Power Corp’s designer political party created on orders of Power Corp’s “secret committee” of Red “Liberals” … to negotiate the dismantling of Canada. And, the negotiations make the goons look like heroes. They will choir that they “saved” Canadian “unity” when a new string of banana republics agrees to “federate” in a new Canadian region, with each level under a new division of powers.
So, how did they get association back in for 1995? With a little fancy footwork, as usual. According to the Pravda-style “Canadian” “documentary” Breaking Point, on the subject of the 1995 referendum, it went like this:
[Transcript of the English film:]
[Download the clip: (coming later)]
Bouchard argues that the YES forces must provide Quebecers with the reassurance they seek.
“Ils ne sont pas des êtres politiques simples.” (They are not political imbeciles.)
On March 12th, Lucien Bouchard decides to act, knowing that many anxious sovereignists back him. He’s going to challenge Jacques Parizeau.
Bouchard wants Parizeau to offer Canada a partnership, and to hold a second referendum before declaring Quebec’s independence.
For Jacques Parizeau, this is heresy. The two men meet in the privacy of the premier’s home in Montreal. A battle of titans has begun.
He wanted to commit to a second referendum where the population of Quebec would ratify the new agreement or treaty or whatever, between Quebec and Canada, as was the case in the 1980 question.
Now, this was, for Mr. Parizeau, and for the Council of Ministers, and for the PQ, out of the question. There would be no return to the two-referendum scenario. And Mr. Bouchard knew that.”
Obviously, Lisée’s reference to an “agreement or treaty or whatever” means there had to be negotiations in 1995, as in 1980. Obviously, they need the second referendum to ratify the “negotiations” desired by Power Corporation, which created the PQ for this purpose, and this alone, using the Reds and other corrupt political tools that it controls.
So what really happened in the end? Here’s what happened. Read the 1995 question:
“Do you agree that Québec should become sovereign, after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership, within the scope of the Bill respecting the future of Québec and of the agreement signed on 12 June 1995?”
The 1980 association was restored to the question of 1995 by calling it a partnership. Obviously, the result of the negotiations would have to be “ratified” … in a second referendum.
<h2 style="text-align:center;padding-bottom:9px;padding-top:12px;"The "NO" side was working for the "YES"
Parizeau knocked down Power Corp in a speech Philpot cites, delivered to the more-rabid Communist wing of the Red PQ, the so-called party “militants”, a month before the 1995 referendum.Giving the impression that Power Corporation was an enemy of Quebec “sovereignty” (as if “sovereignty” were the real target and not dismantling Canada), Parizeau cleverly denounced to his far-left Reds all the “former” employees of Power Corporation who were “working” for the “NO” side: Jean Chrétien, Daniel Johnson, John Rae (aka Cohen). But why did a Montreal businessman organize a last-minute Canada rally three days before the October 30th referendum?
Precisely because the so-called “NO” committee, so obviously controlled by Power Corporation, was doing nothing!
The “NO” committee was, in fact, controlled opposition. Their job was to lose the referendum, to ensure the “negotiations” to restructure Canada for Power Corporation and their Zionist paymasters at the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London. And we know this because Power Corporation is Quebec headquarters for distribution of the Rhodes Scholarships* that emanate from UK in the cause of the globalist bankers behind the RIIA, sometimes known in its early days by one of its front-names: The Milner Group, the folks who brought you WWI and WWII by controlling the Throne of England.
Chrétien, Johnson and Rae were, in fact, working for the YES.
Once that independent businessman began to organize the rally, the guilty parties behind the “NO” had to save face by pitching in. And that is the only reason they had to “prevail”. Because otherwise, they’d have been caught, trying to lose.
Power Corp and their poodles the Liberals could not destroy Canada by themselves. They needed someone to “fight” with to be seen “saving” Canada by pretending the “negotiations” would maintain its “unity”.
Having lost their man inside the Union Nationale party (Daniel Johnson Sr., who died before he could call a referendum), and their man Lesage and his Quebec Liberals whom the voters turfed out in 1966 (unaware that Lesage in 1961 had commissioned the very first stab at a communist plan to run Quebec’s economy), and who had offered the voters a “true national state” (as if to compete with the nationalist Union Nationale); the federal Liberals had no one capable of taking power in Quebec to play ball with. Accordingly, they and Power Corporation were obliged to “invent” a new political playmate to continue their Canadian version of the world-government game. They invented the “separatist” Parti Québécois, and René Lévesque to set it up and run it for them.
<h2 style="text-align:center;padding-bottom:9px;padding-top:12px;"Pouring Oil on the "Separatist" Fire
Philpot reports that American agent E.C. Bittner’s dispatch to Washington quotes Power Corporation Vice President Claude Frenette, who was a member of the Liberal apparatus and of the secret committee:
“The Liberal Party had established a secret committee to beat separatism in Quebec.”
He means the federal Liberal Party, which was led at that time by Lester Bowles Pearson, exposed as a Soviet agent in the U.S. MacCarran hearings, concerning which fact the FBI warned the RCMP, apparently to no avail. First, is this really the “Liberal Party” at work? Key federal ministers from Quebec are meeting Friday nights in Montreal on the business premises of a multinational corporation. Is it normal for Big Business — for any business — to host a political party? Let me rephrase that. How about “own” a political party. Or two. Or more. Is that legal? Is that constitutional? The answer is no, and it would take a few posts. Let’s do that another day.
<h2 style="text-align:center;padding-bottom:9px;padding-top:12px;""Beating" Separatism or "Building" Separatism?
Second: do you “beat” your opponent by giving him a political party; and also the press and headlines required to pursue his cause? And by giving your opponent seats in the Quebec Legislature? Do you legitimate your enemy by inviting him to pit his cause against the very existence of your country? Is that “beating” your opponent? Is that “marginalizing” René Lévesque? Hardly.
They were building René Lévesque up; they created a new party and gave it a chance to destroy Canada for these corporate traitors. Clearly, one side created the other side; one side, the “pro-Canadian-unity” corporate side, designed and launched its own “opponent”, the “separatist” side. Both “sides” were working together. Moreover, “pro-Canadian-unity” doesn’t mean the status quo; it means dismantle and refederate, focusing on the “refederate” part while ignoring the “dismantle” part, which obviously is the opposite of “unity”.
Bittner states that the “secret committee” wished to “discredit the separatist inclinations of the Estates General,” which is a French-Canadian patriotic institution. And how did the “secret committee”, which admittedly “infiltrated” the Estates General, in fact do this? How did it “discredit” the alleged “separatism” of the Estates General?
According to Bittner, the secret committee (Trudeau, Marchand, Sauvé, V.P. Frenette, and others not named) “incited [the Estates General] to take a position so radical with respect to separatism that it would be unbelievable.”
Philpot said in French, “incroyable” (unbelievable); he was obviously translating the Bittner dispatch, written in English.
In his own version of the Bittner dispatch, Jean-François Lisée says the secret committee encouraged the Estates General “to take a position on separatism so radical that it became shocking“: “une position si radicale qu’elle en devienne choquante“. He, too, is translating the dispatch.
Philpot says “unbelievable”, Lisée says “shocking”; we haven’t yet seen Bittner’s original English document. I tried to get it from the U.S. archives and was told it’s in such a tattered state it can’t be handled. Maybe, maybe not. You would think they would photograph things that can’t be handled before they put them in the freezer, so that at least the photo could be consulted.
But the point is, do you “beat” your “separatist” opponent by infiltrating his organization to make it even more “separatist”, even more radical? Do you deliberately escalate the alleged problem, in order to “beat” the problem?
In other words, do you pour oil on the fire, and then claim that you are trying to put the fire out?
Do you know when you are being taken? And by whom?
Obviously, people like Philpot and Lisée like to write political pot-boilers. It’s a living. But, more than that, they are an integral part of Power Corporation’s controlled opposition. They write controlled “history”. Using a small core of facts, they spin the interpretation to be the opposite of reality. The opposite of the obvious, and of common sense. And then the public buys it, and the media lackeys gobble it up and obediently regurgitate the nonsense to affirm it.
The Canadian government and the Quebec government sponsor them with taxpayers’ dollars. You are therefore paying these fellows to brainwash you for their own political ends. And they tell some truth, or else they couldn’t call it a “documentary”, or “non” fiction. But they can’t give the game away. So, pretending to be Quebec nationalist patriots, they denounce the real perpetrator of the sovereignty gambit, so that you won’t see Power Corporation pulling all the “separatist” strings.
<h2 style="text-align:center;padding-bottom:9px;padding-top:12px;""Canadian Unity" Goal A Fraud
The chief canard (as alluded to above) is the myth that Power Corporation and the Desmarais family are backers of “Canadian unity”. Adding the adjective “Canadian” to the noun “unity” (which really means the European system and hides intent to dismantle the Provinces, to transfer their powers to Soviet-style mega-cities), does not transform it into anything remotely “Canadian” (i.e., as in 1867).
For the globalists, “Canadian unity” is in reality (but not openly recognized by the press) a euphemism for re-federation of Canada on the model of the nation-states of the EEC-EU (EUSSR) on the way to merger of the world under a single imposed system. In other words, to get the European system done that they want, which merely represents a chunk of the new world-government system, Quebec has been hijacked by the Zionists and their corporate shills as a tool to restructure all of Canada. The false “patriation” of 1982 is a chunk of the new world “constitution” also being imposed. For more on Canada’s “False Patriation”, see “The Patriation and Legitimacy of the Canadian Constitution” (1982) in which author Barry Lee Strayer admits that the patriation was indeed illegal and a coup.
Indeed, the sole purpose of the “separatist” (Communist-led and corporate-fascist-backed) movement in Quebec under the aegis of Power Corporation with its cohort of Red Liberals and Socialist Rhodes Scholars, is to achieve re-federation using a Quebec UDI. This trigger to “negotiate” the re-federation between the Desmarais-controled federal and Quebec “governments” explains the false pretext of “saving” “Canadian unity”: while destroying your country, they want you to think they’re doing you a favor.
It should be noted, however, that Paul Desmarais is not the sole mover behind this agenda. Peter Nesbitt Thomson who was CEO of Power Corporation in 1964 (and possibly even after 1967), has given speeches including to The Empire Club (1964) which indicate that he, too, was pushing the restructuring of Canada… a restructuring apparently also wanted by the KGB (Golitsyn) and the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) [originally the Business Council on National Issues] of which Power Corporation is a founding member.
Therefore, the people in control of Power Corporation prior to the Desmarais clan are of equal interest. In fact, at the time of the “secret committee” at Power in 1967, Peter Nesbitt Thomson was the controlling owner of Power Corporation; Desmarais was merely “on the point” of purchasing his control over Gesca (the newspaper line owned by Power); and would not purchase control of the rest of Power for another couple of years. Which suggests that the original controlling owners, their heirs and successors, may still be in the shadows of the Desmarais enterprise even today. So, if the Desmarais’ preference for the shadows ought to raise concern; of equal or more concern is the quite shadowy presence of Peter Nesbitt Thomson even before the arrival of the Desmarais.
For example, in February of 1964, Power Corp CEO Peter Nesbitt Thomson told The Empire Club that Canada should have a new constitution to accommodate Quebec’s (ethnic) aspirations. In October of 1964, Mrs. Windsor (Queen Elizabeth IInd) speaking from the precinct of the Quebec provincial Legislature, and seeming to echo Nesbitt Thomson, offered Quebec a new constitution. It might have been a generous token of concern were it not unconstitutional and solely aimed at getting the very same EUSSR restructuring done for the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Zionist bankers’ group based in London (UK) of which Mrs. Windsor is the (unconstitutionally) politically active and official “royal patron”. Ditto for her father before her.
But then, her grandfather, King George V, at the urging of banker Ernst Cassell, financed the London School of Economics (LSE) founded by the pro-Soviet Beatrice and Sydney Webb to train the permanent bureaucrats of the future socialist state (i.e. the state minus free enterprise and representative government). Jacques Parizeau was a graduate of the LSE. As are and have been scads of unelected officials in the Canadian governing structure for a very many decades. (We may one day have to call Mrs. Windsor “The Red Queen” for real.)
Below is my exclusive English translation of an extract from Philpot’s 2014 account of the “secret committee at Power“. The bold and underlines are mine, added to signal the special control and influence of Power Corporation, which hands out the “Rhodes Scholarships” for Quebec and controls Quebec and Canadian politics; and possibly other provinces as well. Rhodes Scholars have been at the helm of major destructive attacks on Canada, including the 1982 coup d’état presented as “patriation”; Trudeau’s War Measures in 1970; secularizing of Quebec’s constitutionally Catholic education system in 1965. Thus, they have worked to denationalize Canada and de-culture Quebec for globalism.
Quebec premier Robert Bourassa (War Measures), said by author Philpot to have practically formed a government merger with Desmarais while in power, was a Rhodes Scholar who advocated the European Union system for North America; the very same as advocated by René Lévesque and Jacques Parizeau to replace Confederation, i.e., “sovereignty association” (1980 referendum) and “sovereignty partnership” (new euphemism) (1995 referendum) both pursued by the Communist Parti Québécois “founded” by the “secret committee” of Red Liberals at Power. (It is said that Bourassa was unknown in Quebec 3 months before he became Premier. Also, Pierre Trudeau was unknown in Canada at large shortly before he became prime minister at the instance of Power Corporation, because the “secret committee” on which Trudeau sat in 1967, which produced the PARTI QUEBECOIS, also produced Trudeau’s election team, and Power Corporation financed Trudeau’s campaign.)
* Rhodes Scholars are a Zionist fifth column, indoctrinated and infiltrated into sensitive positions to destroy the nation-state, using the system devised by Cecil Rhodes, but taken over by the founders of Israel and the rag peddlers of world government.
1 Original French timeline extracts from René Lévesque’s Attendez que je me rappelle…, republished in 1994 by Québec/Amérique:
(i) « octobre  Dans une déclaration à l’Assemblée nationale, René Lévesque souligne que la souveraineté et l’association forment un tout. »
(ii) « juin  Septième Congrès du Parti québécois. Les membres du parti appuient la position de René Lévesque sur le lien entre la souveraineté et l’association. »
(iii) « mai  Référendum. Le «non» l’emporte par 59,6 %, 44,4 % pour le «oui». Le taux de participation est de 86%. Le «oui» obtient une majorité dans 16 des 110 circonscriptions. »
(iv) « 3-6 décembre  Congrès du Parti québécois : radicalisation du parti, une majorité de délégués exclut du programme du parti toute référence à l’association. René Lévesque menace de démissioner. »
READ THE INTRODUCTION TO PHILPOT’S “BEHIND THE DESMARAIS STATE: POWER” IN ENGLISH:
CANADA How The Communists Took Control
By Alan Stang
It’s very exciting to finally be able to offer a complete scan of the original American Opinion offprint of Alan Stang’s “CANADA How The Communists Took Control,” published in 1971 at Belmont, Massachusetts.
The document has been hard to find. It’s in two rare-book collections in Montreal, but the scanning fees demanded were prohibitive. The cheapest was $5.00 per numbered page, the dearest $25.00 per numbered page. So, till now, I’ve had to make do with the poorly scanned partial copy that I found online many years ago.
Inspired by this article, my first “Stang” site went online around 2011 in powrhost, a free WordPress host that doesn’t exist any more. In fact, it was a miracle that I moved to a different host, a paid host, when I did. Powrhost gave no notice before it went offline, taking all its web sites with it.
The Stang site then went up for about 18 months at Visiba, a host I would never recommend due to endless vandalism to my web sites on their servers.
I put a backup version of my Stang site into localhost (xampp) on July 11, 2014 and used it to launch this current site in the free service at WordPress.com, the same year. A couple of weeks ago, I paid to upgrade to basic hosting (all it really does is remove the toe-fungus ads), and it comes with a new domain. In fact, allcheapweb (wild west domains; secureservers) stole the first domain, nosnowinmoscow.com, on the last day before it expired, and it seems to now be in the hands of some Japanese guy who has put a junk site on it.
I shopped for Stang’s “Canada” item online again this week, not expecting to come up with it after all these years of nothing. I needed a nice clean scan of the telegram of Jean-Louis Gagnon in the centerfold for the next segment of my article on Paul Fromm, a faux conservative spy for the national police of Canada reporting to none other than Lester Bowles Pearson (Soviet agent) and Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Red Millionaire), heading our communist-penetrated federal government of Canada.
But, this time, I got lucky. There were at least three copies for sale through Amazon. But Amazon denied my attempts to buy any of the three, claiming no delivery to Canada!
I searched online again because I’ve learned something: many sub-sellers of Amazon, and of other book dealers online, feature the same document at multiple retailers. Lo and behold, I found the Stang reprint right away at Willis Monie Books (www.wilmonie.com) for an amazing $5.00 USD (five yankee bucks)! I added ten more yankee bucks for International Priority Mail and received it hand-to-hand from the postman (or should I say post-lady) today, Friday, November 1st, 2019, in great condition.
Monie did a good job of wrapping the little offprint in clear cellophane and stiff cardboard slid into a padded bubble envelope. That’s nice service for five bucks.
The original offprint is tiny, only about 6″ x 9″ folded, stapled and trimmed. The front cover is navy blue and white with black text. Everything else is black and white. The signature of the previous owner in very elegant handwritten script is on the cover, between the title and Stang’s name as author. The signature seems to be Robert E. Updike. So, Bob, if you’re out there, thanks very much for the copy!
I’ve scanned it at 200 dpi (removed the signature from the cover scan) and OCR’d the little pamphlet, then put it online for free at SCRIBD, thus the pamphlet is embedded, above. The original of the pamphlet, which I no longer need, has been donated to the Quebec Archives. They have one copy in preservation at their Rare Books facility in Montreal; now they have another.
Also fun to have are the full-page ads at the back of the brochure for two books by Western Islands, G. Edward Griffin’s The Fearful Master, A Second Look at the United Nations; and The C.F.R. [The Council on Foreign Relations] Conspiracy To Rule The World by Dan Smoot. A third ad makes me want to go shop for this one: Robert Welch’s The Politician, first out in 1963.
I hope you enjoy the new word-searchable, complete copy of CANADA How the Communists Took Control by Alan Stang, hosted here at “No Snow in Moscow,” the Canadian web site in Stang’s honor. The pamphlet is also embedded on the About tab, top menu.
Oh, yes, and one great perk that came with the issue is the short blurb inside the front cover. “About the author” says:
Alan Stang is a former business editor for Prentice-Hall, Inc., and has written, produced, and done research for network radio and television. Mr. Stang is an AMERICAN OPINION Contributing Editor and is author of the Western Islands bestsellers, It’s Very Simple and The Actor. Author Stang, who earned his B.A. at City College of New York and his Masters at Columbia University, spent months researching this article and interviewed authorities on the scene in Canada.
Reprints of this copyrighted article, Canada by Alan Stang, are available at the following prices: One to 99 copies, three for one dollar; 100-999 copies, twenty-five cents each; 1,000 or more copies, twenty cents each.
This article first appeared in AMERICAN OPINION magazine, a Conservative journal of opinion in April of 1971. The subscription rate for AMERICAN OPINION, to any address in the United States, is ten dollars per year; twelve dollars to other countries. For either reprints or subscriptions, address:
Belmont, Massachusetts 02178
Who is F. Paul Fromm?
This article will attempt to figure that out. To that end, I ask: If an organization is set up as a police front, isn’t whoever set it up working for the police? And for those behind the police? Who, in this case, happen to be Communists.
The answer to the question turns on whether or not the tactics of the EBS in May of 1971 were intended to protect Soviet Agent Lester Bowles Pearson, and the whole federal government apparatus in Canada from a communist clean-out.
The Edmund Burke Society: A Police Front.
A Police Front of the Communist-Penetrated
Alleged Policy of the EBS
“One of the cardinal principles adopted by the EDMUND BURKE SOCIETY from its very foundation was that we would co-operate with other conservative and anti-communist groups. We might feel that other groups might be too wishy-washy, too outspoken, poorly informed, or participating in dead-end causes or activities. We vowed that we would seek to co-operate with such groups in areas of common interest. We would not spend our time in fratricidal bickering and hair-splitting. The fight against our strong and common enemy is far more important than petty differences as to method or personality.”
— By F. Paul Fromm, B.A., writing in “Only Pawns in their Game“, Straight Talk!, Volume III, Number 1, September 1970
That principle is echoed throughout the issues that Fromm edited. But, notwithstanding this nobly phrased sentiment, Fromm as editor of Straight Talk!, “The Official Bulletin of the Edmund Burke Society”, and his writer Jaanus Proos, in their May 1971 issue, viciously attacked American anti-communist Allan Stang with lies bordering on slander, and mealy-mouthed tactics of the kind typically used to silence valid information exposing Communists. In other words, these “free-speechers” lied about Stang and defamed him to squelch him.
Also not mentioned, Barrett may not have known, Pearson was a Soviet agent exposed in the U.S. McCarran hearings and to the FBI by Elizabeth Bentley, while defecting from Soviet military intelligence, the GRU. The U.S. McCarran hearings followed and were prompted by the Gouzenko spy trials in Canada. Those “spy trials” left many questions unasked, and many spies untried, as three successive prime ministers put a squelch on most of the Gouzenko materials. Those three prime ministers were Freemason John George Diefenbaker; Soviet agent Lester Bowles Pearson; and Communist Pierre Elliott Trudeau. As of this writing, there is no indication the squelch was ever lifted. Download the “Forerunners” segment of Is God A Racist?; it contains the grudging admission of Barrett that Fromm’s EBS was a national police front.
At the time of the Fromm-Proos attack on Stang, in May of 1971, the EBS would have been controlled by national police reporting to Communist Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau and to Trudeau’s red Solicitor General (who also reported to Trudeau) Jean-Pierre Goyer. In his April 1971 “Canada” exposé, Stang profiled Mr. Goyer:
Another thing you need if you are imposing a dictatorship is control of the police. In Canada, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are controlled by the Solicitor-General. So Trudeau made Jean-Pierre Goyer the Solicitor-General — when Parliament was not in session and could not question him. Goyer, it goes without saying, was a regular contributor to Cité Libre. [Trudeau’s pro-Soviet review.] Isn’t everybody? He was once arrested for staging a sit-in outside the office of the Premier of Quebec. He has been involved in several pro-Communist fronts. And he has attended Communist meetings behind the Iron Curtain. Like his friend Trudeau, he is a revolutionary.
This is the man now running the national police of Canada.
This is the man who is the “Boss” of the Edmund Burke Society when Proos attacks Allan Stang in May of 1971 to discredit Stang’s intended exposure of Soviet agent Pearson.
In fact, Fromm-Proos buffered their attack on Stang by admitting (an apparent tactic) the truth of Stang’s write-up on reds in the federal government, including his exposé on their own secret boss, Goyer:
“Nevertheless, against these disadvantages, Stang has put together a commendable summary, covering the highly questionable backgrounds of Trudeau, Gagnon, Goyer, the F.L.Q., Praxis Corporation, and the “peace” Movement; dealing with facts long familiar to regular readers of STRAIGHT TALK!”
But, why the attack on Stang? Stang and the John Birch Society planned a mass-mailing to Canadians to expose communist Pearson.
That Canadian mass-mailing intended by Stang and the JBS who published Stang’s Canada article in American Opinion in April 1971, is the target of paragraph one of the Fromm-Proos assault on Stang in the May 8th, 1971 issue of Straight Talk!, Volume III,Number 8. Said Proos, with F. Paul Fromm, B.A. as Editor and Kastuś Akula, by the way, Associate Editor:
In the April issue of AMERICAN OPINION, the John Birch Society’s monthly publication, there was a 27-page article titled “CANADA: How the Communists took control”. Its author, Alan Stang, diagnosed Canada to be in the same position today as Cuba was after the Castro takeover in 1959. In its missionary zeal, the U.S.-based Birch Society has undertaken to warn the Canadian people of the impending disaster via a mass-mailing (around 100,000 copies) of the article to professionals and businessmen in Canada. The scheme is to be financed through $25,000 raised in Canada and a like amount drawn from J.B.S. funds.
That mailing is what Fromm and Proos were afraid of. The effect of their attack on Stang could only protect Pearson from 100,000 letters to Canadians that would have exposed him as a Communist. Imagine the inquiry and the federal clean-up that might have ensued in Canada if that mailing had been done. Not only Pearson, but Goyer, Trudeau and the rest of the appointed and elected Reds would have been outed.
Moreover, Fromm had set up the Edmund Burke Society as a national police front under Communist Lester Pearson, thus, the attack on Stang to halt the mass-mailing spared Fromm and his EBS from exposure as faux “conservative” tools of the same band of Communists.Jean-Pierre Goyer was Solicitor General of Canada from December 22, 1970 to November 26, 1972, in charge of the national police and national security of Canada. Those were the national police agencies (plural) who set up the Edmund Burke Society in 1967 under Pearson and Goyer’s predecessors; Goyer himself reports to Communist Pierre Trudeau at the time Proos and Fromm attack anticommunist Alan Stang to protect Pearson — and the whole federal level — from a mailing to expose the Communists.
Obviously, Mr. Goyer was in charge of the “security” of the undisclosed Communists (and their handlers, the multinationals and the international bankers) who had (and still have) their grip on Canada.
Brian Ruhe has titled a filmed interview with Paul Fromm: “Brian Ruhe & Paul Fromm: Jews Created the Canadian Nazi Party in 1965”. The two parts of the film online, labeled part 1 of 1 and part 2 of 2, don’t actually deal with that subject, perhaps the middle was cut out that explains how the Jews supposedly did it. But Fromm at the end of the film agrees with Ruhe that he likes the title “Brian Ruhe & Paul Fromm Jews Created the Canadian Nazi Party in 1965.”
By the end of part 2, Fromm states the Canadian Jewish Congress founded the Nazi party, and then eventually destroyed it, and that it was done as a pretext to pass hate-speech laws in Canada. Fromm offers no details as to the modus operandi of the Jews in setting up their little Nazi party.
We do know, from Adrien Arcand writing in 1965 in DOWN WITH HATE! that the royal commission on hate propaganda was a vehicle of the Canadian Jewish Congress; and that the CJC’s ex-president on that Hate committee, “Mr. Saul Hayes, Q.C., of the CJC”, made some enigmatic statements in a CJC publication concerning the Vatican Council II and the consequent future of Communism. Devout Catholic Adrien Arcand wrote:
M. Hayes est aussi écrivain, à l’occasion. L’été dernier, il faisait publier sa prose en première page du “Bulletin du Cercle Juif, organe officiel français du Congrès Juif Canadien. L’occasion de son intervention littéraire était importante, il s’agissait de nous faire savoir ce que lui ou le CJC pensait du Concile Oecuménique Vatican II. Entre autres considérations et conclusions du grand événement mondial, M. Saul Hayes écrivait donc (No. de juillet-août 1964):
Mr. Hayes is also a writer, on occasion. Last summer, he published his prose on the front page of the “Bulletin du Cercle Juif“, the official French organ of the Canadian Jewish Congress. The motive of his literary intervention was important, it was to let us know what he or the CJC thought of the Ecumenical Council of Vatican II. Among other considerations and conclusions from the great world event, Mr. Saul Hayes wrote (July-August issue, 1964):
“Dans de telles conditions, la civilisation occidentale et chrétienne ne peut plus dominer le monde et le catholicisme doit faire face à de nouvelles forces tels (sic) que le communisme et l’athéisme”.
“In such conditions, Western and Christian civilization can no longer dominate the world and Catholicism must confront new forces like Communism and atheism”.
I know from my own research that the other CJC ex-president on the Hate Committee, Maxwell Cohen, was a pro-red Zionist; according to a brief to the federal government in 1956, Cohen was paid to smear Senator Joseph McCarthy by the Canadian CBC and various publications. That news comes from Ron Gostick, with whom Fromm claims to have been associated. Thus, the royal committee on hate propaganda seems to have been a vehicle of pro-Communist Jews. All the more so, if Judaism cannot be separated from Communism, the latter being a device of the former to achieve the aims of the Talmud. Please read Arcand.
Now, if Mr. Fromm is willing to say that the Jews set up Canada’s Nazi party in 1965; he cannot then deny the viability of the accusation quoted by Barrett that he himself set up the Edmund Burke Society as a national police front (more below). Nor the observation by me that he did it under Soviet agent Lester Bowles Pearson as his primary employer, and therefore that Paul Fromm and his EBS were a conduit for communist moles, and merely pretended to attack the Communists.
LEFT-WING AUTHOR STANLEY BARRETT
GRUDGINGLY OUTS THE EBS AS A POLICE FRONT
Author Stanley R. Barrett, in his book, Is God a Racist?, describes the founding of the Edmund Burke Society (EBS), which he says at pages 70-71 was set up as a national police front via campus security. There is a copy of some of the book in google books online. It was originally published in 1987 by the University of Toronto Press. I got myself a used paperback from Amazon for about two bucks, ISBN 0-8020-6673-9; I have a 1989 reprint. You can download the extract, “Forerunners”. Here are the relevant excerpts:
1 – BARRETT ON THE ABOVE-GROUND (VISIBLE) FOUNDING OF THE EBS:
“In February 1967 three young men sat around a counter at a coffee shop in Toronto’s Lord Simcoe Hotel. They had just attended a meeting of the Canadian Alliance for Free Enterprise (CAFE), an organization inspired by the conservative writings of Ayn Rand. The shared view of the three men was that CAFE was a ‘talk group’. They believed, in contrast, that the danger of communism and the disintegration of Western society demanded action. The upshot was the decision to establish a new organization, one that could canalize ‘militant conservative activism.’ In this way was born The Edmund Burke Society.
The three founding members were Donald Andrews, Paul Fromm, and Leigh Smith, at the time public-health inspector, University of Toronto student, and secondary-school teacher respectively. Although all three were solidly middle class, their backgrounds were quite different, as were their eventual right-wing careers. Andrews, born in Yugoslavia, came to Canada under circumstances that can only be described as poignant. His father, a partisan during the Second World War, had been killed by German soldiers. His mother married a Canadian serviceman and emigrated to Canada, leaving behind her son, whose whereabouts were unknown. Finally, she located him, with the help of the Red Cross, and at the age of about ten Canada became his new home. Fromm, whose father was an accountant for an oil company, was born in Colombia [Bogota], although his ancestry is French Canadian and German. Only Smith was born in Canada, the youngest of a large family in Quebec.”
2. BARRETT RE THE SITE OF OPERATIONS OF THE EBS (U of T CAMPUS):
“There is little doubt that the college campuses, especially the University of Toronto, were the center of Edmund Burke Society activity, and that the man of the hour was Paul Fromm.”
3 – BARRETT ON THE REALITY OF THE EBS AS A POLICE FRONT:
“I now turn to a rather sensitive issue: the possible involvement of the police in establishing the Edmund Burke Society. In 1982 while carrying out research in British Columbia, I came across a document that threw quite a different light on this organization. According to the document, the Edmund Burke Society was actually set up as an instrument for Canada’s security services in order to draw out the left wing and crystallize its right-wing opposition. The kingpin behind all this was supposedly a military man, trained at one point by a CIA anti-subversive squad, who had been active in university-campus security for the armed forces in the late 1960s. Working along with him was a ‘red squad,’ a common term in police circles for a group of people organized and trained to infiltrate organizations, act as agents provocateurs, and generally undermine the left wing by various ‘dirty tricks.’
How serious [sic] should one take these charges? At the outset it must be pointed out that most of the information in the document consists of the speculations of a man who had been fired from the Central Housing and Mortgage Corporation for allegedly showing a cabinet document to the Native Council of Canada (he later won a court case for wrongful
dismissal). It could reasonably be argued that this man had no reason to love the state bureaucracy. And yet, there is a great deal of circumstantial evidence that lends plausibility to his accusations. There are, for example, newspaper reports of his dismissal and trial, as well as the military man’s role in campus security. Several of those said to belong to the ‘red squad’ were, indeed, members of the Edmund Burke Society. Moreover, I know for a fact that at least two of them have over the years been police informers. Finally, the document itself was submitted to an inquiry about the RCMP by a Progressive Conservative MP. If the charges in the document are fanciful, the person who prepared it should be congratulated for his imaginative powers. However, if the RCMP and other police agencies did not control the Edmund Burke Society behind the scenes, perhaps there will be someone in the top echelons asking: why not?!”
Note the activity here: “According to the document, the Edmund Burke Society was actually set up as an instrument for Canada’s security services in order to draw out the left wing and crystallize its right-wing opposition.” Our Communist-occupied federal government appointed Fromm to “crystallize” and “draw out” two opposing sides. Note that Fromm’s career will be occupied in efforts to “crystallize” and “polarize” two more opposing sides: the “Rest of Canada” (in the form of political parties opposed to Quebec) … in order to “negotiate” the dismantling of Canada with the red political party created in Quebec by the Pearson fed in 1967, meaning, necessarily, the North American Union; because the reds are aiming for decentralization of the nation-state into city-states, Communist multicultural city-state regions under a one-world government).
Barrett concludes in the middle of the next section:
“[…] the Edmund Burke Society’s significance should not be underrated; it provided the training ground for the two principal figures who were to dominate the scene during the years ahead: Andrews on the far right and Fromm on the fringe right.”
The fact that Barrett did not footnote this material — obviously to protect his “right-wing” “racist” theory — adds credibility to the allegations. His theory being, in the chapter “Forerunners”, that the tiny Canadian Nazi party (1965) and Fromm’s Edmund Burke Society (1967) were grass-roots operations that were symptomatic of what Barrett considers “right-wing” extremism taking root in Canada. Perhaps Barrett was concerned that if he didn’t at least make the admission that the EBS was a police front, someone else might find “the document” that he himself had found, and discredit his book.
Despite Barrett’s blackout on the identities of the men involved in his grudging exposé, I have managed to identify the man who was fired from the Central Housing and Mortgage Corporation, whom Barrett says exposed the EBS as a police front. That man was Walter Rudnicki.
And I have managed to identify the MP who I think submitted Rudnicki’s document to an inquiry about the RCMP. That man was Frank Oberle, Senior, a Progressive-Conservative MP from Prince George-Peace River.
In this short segment from the Commons Debates of October 31, 1977 (pages 487-488) (you can find them online in Canadiana.org), Oberle Sr. says:
“Hon. members will recall the case I made when my friend, Walter Rudnicki, was indeed tried and convicted without a chance to defend himself. A brilliant civil service career was destroyed. His family life was interrupted by this government simply because he was identified as a subversive. He was fired from the public service.”
That identifies Oberle as linked with Rudnicki. A very strong indication that I do have the right MP is the additional material in the same Federal Hansard from October 1977, where Oberle provides the House of Commons with a useful snapshot of Canada’s multiple security forces, and identifies the civilian force that Barrett calls the ‘red squads’ which were used along with the EBS in the campus-based police operation at U of T to set up a right-wing front in Canada. Our PC member from Prince George-Peace River, in the Commons Debates of October 31, 1977, narrates. (See Hansard, page 487.)
Mr. F. Oberle:
Top left column of the page of Hansard above:
“Let us for a moment consider what is meant by the term security forces. Take a look at some of them. We must be specific. Apart from the RCMP law enforcement agency, the federal agency, there is, of course, what we know as the security service which is responsible to the Commissioner of the RCMP but which has a very special task, that of reacting to subversives, terrorists and so on. This is an intelligence agency within the RCMP.
Then there is another security force which is called the security analysis group and which operates under the auspices of the Solicitor General. Perhaps I may quote a former solicitor general, the present Minister of Supply and Services (Mr. Goyer), explaining its functions on September 21, 1971. He said the purpose was to study the nature, origin, and causes of subversive and revolutionary action, its objectives and techniques, as well as measures necessary to protect Canadians from internal threats.
Furthermore, the task of this particular security force is to compile and analyze information on subversive and revolutionary groups and other activities, to investigate the nature and scope of the internal threat to Canadians, and to plan measures to counteract those threats. The Solicitor General told us repeatedly that this particular group was not an operational group. We know better. As my hon. friend from the Yukon has clearly shown, this group is indeed an operational police force. It recruits and trains agents to provoke actions within unions and on university campuses, to infiltrate right wing and left wing societies, to encourage them to demonstrate on the streets, and to promote acts which are normally illegal
Now that we have an idea as to the kind of security forces which are operating in this country I ask the question: why is it necessary sometimes, as the Prime Minister says, for these agencies to break the law?”
We have thus identified as fact, thanks to a sitting MP, that security services of Canada do recruit “agents” “on university campuses” for clandestine operations. Fromm was on a university campus (Saint Michael’s College, U of T) when he set up the Edmund Burke Society in 1967, and which Barrett grudgingly admits was a national security front.
The two worst Communists openly denounced by EBS were in fact running the EBS through control over Canada’s national security and police apparatus in 1971
when Fromm and Proos attacked Stang to stop the mass-mailing
Solicitors General over RCMP et als, over EBS
Lawrence Pennell under Pearson July 7, 1965 – April 20, 1968 John Napier Turner under Trudeau April 20, 1968 – July 5, 1968 George James McIlraith under Trudeau July 6, 1968 – December 21, 1970 Jean-Pierre Goyer under Trudeau December 22, 1970 – November 26, 1972
It’s interesting that a fifth Solicitor-general in office after the Western Guard has taken over from the EBS in an attempted “purge of police spies” according to author Stanley R. Barrett, is none other than current president of the World Federalists, the “Liberal” Warren Allmand, a signatory to the UNPA, a world petition for an elected assembly at the United Nations.
This “elected” world government (forced into place by two banker-financed wars to set up the League of Nations and then the U.N.) would cement the century-long coup on our countries with the appearance of democracy, called “democratism” by Soviet defector Anatoliy Golitsyn.
|Warren Allmand||under Trudeau||November 27, 1972 – September 13, 1976|
Francis Fox, Solicitor-general after Goyer and also under Trudeau, appears in the October 31st Hansard of the Commons Debates on the RCMP question. Fox was in office (now a cabinet post) from September 14, 1976 – January 27, 1978.
According to Wikipedia (page last modified on 9 December 2016, at 00:56):
“The Solicitor General of Canada was a position in the Canadian ministry from 1892 to 2005. The position was based on the Solicitor General in the British system and was originally designated as an officer to assist the Minister of Justice.”
In February of 1967 when Paul Fromm and his colleagues founded the Edmund Burke Society, Louis Cardin was justice Minister; barely two months later, Pierre Elliott Trudeau was Justice Minister.
However, Trudeau was present with Pearson from the outset. Having been elected from the “safe” (majority Jewish) Mount Royal riding in Montreal, Red Pierre assumed the facade of a Member of Parliament on November 8th, 1965. On arriving in Ottawa, Trudeau was appointed parliamentary secretary to Soviet agent, Prime Minister Lester Pearson; Trudeau became Justice Minister on April 4, 1967. In March of 1967, the Edmund Burke Society held its first public meeting (Barrett, p. 52).
Moreover, when Trudeau worked for Pearson, the design was already in place to catapult Trudeau into the PMO, underlining the organic alignment between Communist Pierre Trudeau and Soviet agent Pearson. Sources indicate that Pearson was dying of cancer. That nonetheless changes nothing of the fact that Pearson danced a quick-step to keep Canada under control in the hands of a trusted protégé.
As Alan Stang observes in his April 1971 article, a manoeuvre he calls “The Big Switch” took place. Czar-like, Trudeau inherited Pearson’s top office by default.
Indeed, Trudeau was both Prime Minister and Justice Minister in December of 1967 when Pearson announced his intention to retire and Pierre stepped into Pearson’s shoes as de facto Prime Minister of Canada. The whole of Canada’s national police and security establishment thus reported to Pierre Trudeau, the Communist. It had previously reported to Lester Bowles Pearson, aka “Mike”, a Soviet agent.
If you don’t believe Trudeau was a ommunist, read his editorials in Le Devoir in 1952. See my exclusive English translation of Trudeau’s 7-part series, “I’m Back From Moscow”, on his communist-financed trip to the 1952 Moscow economic summit, a Soviet intelligence front. Yes, Pierre Elliott Trudeau, while employed in Canada’s Privy Council Office as a junior researcher and adviser to Prime Minister Louis Saint-Laurent (who told the U.N. in 1946 that it was “the basis” of the coming “world government”), led a Communist delegation organized by the Communist Party of Canada to a Moscow Economic Summit organized by V.V. Kuznetsov of Soviet Intelligence.
Allan Stang, in CANADA How The Communists Took Control, paints this picture of Pierre Trudeau, an obviously Communist junior adviser at the time of his employment in the Privy Council Office of Louis Saint-Laurent:
“Indeed, so obvious was the nature of the forthcoming conference that in December, 1951, then-Canadian Justice Minister Stuart Garson warned all Cabinet Ministers that it was a Communist operation, and advised that government employees should not attend.
The conference was held in April, 1952. Of the 471 delegates, 132 were from officially Communist countries. Observers at the time estimated that 300 of the remaining 339 were known or suspected Party members – which left 39 or so for window dressing.
Marcus Leslie Hancock, one of the six delegates from Canada [led by Trudeau], says the Canadian delegation was organized by the Canadian Communist Party, which also paid the delegates’ bills. Hancock, then a Communist, says that everyone else he knew in the delegation was also a Party member.”
In April OF 1968, a Liberal convention picked Pierre Elliott Trudeau as Pearson’s official successor. Apparently proving that Canada has no real intelligence; it has long been hijacked.
Along with the Prime Minister’s Office, Trudeau inherited control of the national police, which necessarily included personal supervision of an operation known as The Edmund Burke Society.
THE WESTERN GUARD:
An Effort to Purge “Police Spies”
Barrett accounts in part for the emergence of the Western Guard out of the Edmund Burke Society, starting at page 75 (and keep in mind, Barrett has admitted the allegation that the EBS was a police front; but he now sails on, presuming it was merely a grass-roots movement):
“The emergence of the Western Guard was a clear sign that the radicals in the Edmund Burke Society had won out over the more moderate sector, and a direct consequence was the resignation of several members, notably Paul Fromm. Although Fromm eventually went on to establish a variety of organizations that paralleled the philosophy of the moribund Edmund Burke Society, he remained a member of the militant Western Guard for almost three months after the council decision had been taken to create it. At a banquet held in Toronto in April 1972, attended by a leading member of the Ku Klux Klan, from Michigan, Fromm gave the opening address (Toronto Sun, 1 May 1972). In that same month, he spoke to a group of high-school students in Arnprior under the auspices of the Western Guard (Straight Talk, vol. 4, no. 7, April 1972). The announcement of the name change had appeared in the March issue of Straight Talk, but in the April issue Fromm [page 76] was still listed as the Editor. It was not until the next issue (May-June 1972) that he ceased being the editor, and a note appeared announcing his resignation. No other comment was made then, but in the July issue there was a lengthy report on his resignation, revealing that it had been a very bitter affair. Apparently, there had been an agreement whereby Fromm would promise not to establish another right-wing organization, nor would he announce his resignation from the Western Guard to the press. However, Fromm did in fact give a press release, and Western Guard officials were of the opinion that he was trying to reconstruct the Edmund Burke Society, and to retain Straight Talk as its organ (Fromm had the mailing list for subscribers. Moreover, they claimed that Fromm had made off with $400 from the Western Guard treasury. The parting shot was the accusation that he had arranged to have a female member of the right wing arrested at one of his meetings in June 1972. This was a friend of Geza Matrai, the man who attacked Kosygin in 1971.”
Barrett now returns (page 77) to the allegations of (Walter Rudnicki) referred to at the end of his previous chapter.
Finally, an intriguing explanation for the emergence of the Western Guard, as well as for Fromm’s resignation, concerns the alleged involvement of some of Canada’s police agencies in establishing the Edmund Burke Society in the first place. According to the document about this matter referred to in the last chapter, a faction of the Edmund Burke Society eventually rebelled against the police agencies’ close control over its activities. This faction expelled Fromm and and the principal (undercover) police agent, and founded the Western Guard. The latter, of course, was to be free from police influence, but the document in question states that some members of the ‘red squad’ remained in the Western Guard. Moreover, by 1975, an agent provocateur had worked his way into the organization, eventually playing a crucial role in putting Andrews behind bars. I suppose it could be argued that the determined actions on the part of the police to imprison Andrews merely confirmed that the had earlier been in control of the right-wing organization, and were miffed when the Western Guard shunted them aside. That, however, strikes me as far-fetched. Somewhat more plausible evidence of the involvement of the police, but still far from concrete, was Fromm’s own statement that he resigned partly ‘because of the growing lack of security in the Western Guard’. Indeed, at a Social Credit meeting at the end of February 1972, members of the newly formed Western Guard reportedly informed the Socreds that the change had been made ‘as a move to purge police spies and other undesirables’ who had managed to infiltrate the Edmund Burke Society (Globe and Mail, 28 February 1982).
Barrett manages in that last scenario to make it seem as though Fromm himself was opposed to the police infiltration. This contradicts Barrett’s earlier observations, drawn from the (Rudnicki) document, that (1) the EBS was set up as a police front, and not merely infiltrated later, although subsequent infiltration did take place; (2) Fromm was the man of the hour when the campus agent for the national police saw to the setting up of the EBS.
Said Baarrett at page 53:
“There is little doubt that the college campuses, especially the University of Toronto, were the center of Edmund Burke Society activity, and that the man of the hour was Paul Fromm.”
Unless Fromm himself, from the University of Toronto campus, was a police agent, and a stoolie for the reds under Pearson who needed to create and polarize “left” and “right” movements in Canada (obviously to use them); then the EBS could not have been set up; neither of the other two visible founders was from a campus. Therefore, Fromm’s alleged statement that he resigned from the Western Guard over ‘security’ (police-spy) issues, would be self-serving and tactical.
However, what is truly interesting about the “police spy” allegations in the (Rudnicki) document that Barrett refers to, are the known facts that: the EBS was set up by the national police (for a federal government under penetrated Communist control) in 1967. And Pierre Elliott Trudeau, while a cabinet minister in the same Pearson cabal was part of a “secret committee” at Power Corporation of Canada which also in 1967 ordered René Lévesque to set up the Parti Québécois (PQ). These are two federal operations: a designer Communist party for Quebec; and a designer “far-right” party for the “Rest of Canada”.
The Parti Québécois is communist; its 1972 manifesto is Communist (free download in the sidebar). You could hardly set up a Communist party to break up Canada without also creating right-wing subversion in the rest of the country, ready to “negotiate” with it after a “Yes” in a referendum.
CONCLUSION – Part I
To wrap this segment up, referring to the 100,000-piece mailing planned by the John Birch Society (“The John Birch Society Looks at Trudeau: A Review by Jaanus Proos”, Straight Talk! Volume III, Number 8, May 1971), Janus Proos warns:
“Should the scheme come to fruition, flooding our nation with yet another round of ‘hate literature’ against our swinging P.M., both the ‘CANADA’ article and the J.B.S. will be smeared to no end. Of concern to active Canadian anti-communists, particularly the Edmund Burke Society, is the overflow of indignation and disbelief that will reach beyond the J.B.S. to the entire anti-communist movement, in fact, to anyone suggesting that communism poses a threat to Canada.”
Yes, do not mass-mail 100,000 warnings to the Canadian electorate that Pearson is a Communist, it will “harm” the anticommunist movement! It won’t be believed! The hypocrisy of this line stands in stark contrast to the reality known to Editor Mr. Paul Fromm and apparently soon forgotten by his readers. Note that Proos says “yet another”. When had a mailing been done before?
In his 2005 obituary entitled “Ron Gostick, R.I.P.”, penned for On Target, journal of the Australian League of Rights (ALOR) and published on 26 August 2005, Paul Fromm pats Gostick on the back for a far bigger mass-mailing exposing none other than Red Pierre Trudeau in 1968. Here is Paul Fromm, verbatim:
“In 1968, a new comet flashed across the firmament of Canadian politics. His name was Pierre Trudeau. The press promoted him as a fresh breath in Canadian politics, a change from the World War I generation of old war horses like John Diefenbaker and Lester Pearson. Trudeau, Canadians were told, was trendy, irreverent, prone to wearing a cape or posing holding a rose rakishly in his mouth. Pat Walsh, a veteran as an undercover agent in communist circles in the Province of Quebec, recognized Trudeau and some of his associates. He’d briefly flirted with the NDP. Trudeau was far more to the left than the press was telling Canadians. Ron Gostick did an extraordinary thing. While the press gushed about Trudeau image and antics, he actually read what Trudeau had written and researched his activities. He found in Trudeau an admirer of Castro and Mao, a man who had visited Red China in the early 1960s at the depths of the ‘Great Leap Forward’ famine, and returned gushing with admiration. Ron Gostick published his findings and, assisted with the list of Liberal convention delegates supplied by the disgruntled Paul Martin Sr’s campaign, he began to circulate his warnings. Hundreds of thousands of the relevant pamphlets were distributed. In Toronto, Tory Senator Wallace McCutcheon funded the reprinting of perhaps 60,000 leaflets derived from Mr. Gostick’s work by the fledgling Edmund Burke Society of which I was a member.
I had first met Mr. Gostick the year before at a lecture at a downtown hotel. I was immediately impressed by his knowledge and methodology: quoting important sources and offering an illuminating commentary. Mr. Gostick’s warning about Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s affection for communism, his totalitarian streak and his eagerness to change Canadian society brought him a torrent of abuse. He was denounced as a “hatemonger.” As has happened in so many instances since, his opponents didn’t say he was wrong, didn’t argue with his facts. They simply hollered ‘hate’ and said he shouldn’t have said those things. Within a few years, it became obvious that Ron Gostick’s warnings were more than valid. Not until the early ’70s did a few right of centre journalists like Lubor Zink and Peter Worthington dare to say what Ron Gostick had said in 1968.”
My, oh my. Alan Stang “dared” to say it of Pearson in 1971 and was flamed for it by Proos and Fromm, whose EBS had allegedly participated in that same Gostick mass-mailing.
Proos alleged the mailing would damage the anticommunist movement.
In “Frightening Canadian Federal Elections,” for The New Times, Vol. 34, No. 7, July 1968 (Australian League of Rights — ALOR), Eric D. Butler gives a different history of that mailing of Pat Walsh’a material on Trudeau by Gostick, and its outcome.
First, so effective was the mailing on Trudeau by Gostick that Butler reports, in his highlighted opening paragraph:
“Mr. Ron Gostick, director of the Canadian League of Rights, played a major role in the elections. If it had not been for the tremendous campaign initiated by Mr. Gostick, the Trudeau victory would have been astronomical. But as Mr. (Eric) Butler reports, there is every sign of a major conservative grass-roots upsurge.”
Butler then tells the story of the “Frightening” Canadian elections of 1968, the Trudeaumania, the exploitation of teenagers with a spectacle approaching mass mysteria in some quarters, the absence of a platform, and Red Pierre Trudeau’s “deep and well-organized support inside the mass media”. However, said Walsh:
“… a development of the greatest significance started to take place. There was an increasing flood of demands right across Canada for The Canadian Intelligence Services issue on Mr. Trudeau. The flood reached tidal proportions and Canadian Intelligence Publications could not meet the demand. Some groups were authorized to reprint. Others did not bother to seek permission to republish. A grass-roots development was now taking place, which had broken the boycott of silence by the mass media. Mr. Trudeau’s strategists then decided that something had to be done.”
F. Paul Fromm, B.A. and Janus Proos obviously knew how successful a mass-mailing could be. While Proos claimed it would harm the anticommunist movement, he forgot to say that the mailing the EBS itself took part in (unless they delivered their own 60,000 copies to a dumpster), created not disbelief but tremendous interest among Canadians who had been betrayed by their left-leaning media. The truth comes out when Eric Butler writes about the “Frightening Canadian Federal Elections”.
Proos and Fromm smeared American anticommunist Alan Stang to prevent a Canadian mass-mailing. They smeared him to protect Soviet agent Pearson, and the Communist penetration of the federal government for which they, themselves were working.
They smeared Allan Stang by alleging he had published a forgery in CANADA How The Communists Took Control! Said Proos:
“A telegram, reproduced on the article’s centerfold, reputed to have been sent by Jean-Louis Gagnon is an outright forgery. A similar telegram was sent but not this one.”
Stang’s head must have spun, the telegram he published in American Opinion was identical to the telegram Straight Talk! published in a parallel issue that same month of April 1971.
In the next installment of this exposé on Paul Fromm, stooge for the Reds, I will show you the two identical telegrams.
… To be continued.
Read Eric D. Butler’s “Frightening Canadian Federal Elections,” for The New Times, Vol. 34, No. 7, July 1968 (Australian League of Rights – ALOR)
Read some of the material Pat Walsh and Ron Gostick circulated on Red Pierre Trudeau in 1968: ““Trudeau Spearheading Fabian Takeover””, Canadian Intelligence Service (private publication) VOL. 18 — NO. 3 Flesherton, Ontario, March, 1968
In the sidebar: Exclusive English translation of the 1972 manifesto of the Parti Québécois for a Communist state of Quebec, under “industrial democracy,” the “true heir to Karl Marx” on the program of the Socialist International.
SUBSCRIBE. I’m a researcher. What I learn, you learn.
Once upon a time in Canada, you and I were lied to, over and over again. The Trudeau fairy tale is one long lie from start to end. Official accounts of Trudeau’s 1960 canoe stunt off the Florida Keys are just one instance of the endless fabrications that have been sold as “history”. Here is the real story, from Red Pierre, himself.
Download Key West Canoe Coverage 1960 in a zip file.
Read the stories here: Canadians Plan Canoe Trip To Cuba By Don Daniels.
When Did Pierre Trudeau and Fidel Castro
meet for the first time?
The Official Story: they first met in 1976
Robert Wright, the author of Three Nights in Havana, contributed an opinion piece to The Globe and Mail on 26 November 2016, updated 11 April 2017; accessed 2 October 2019: “Castro and Trudeau: a famous, but also fraught friendship.”
In a three-paragraph segment, Wright establishes the “first time” Trudeau and Castro “crossed paths” (1970) and their subsequent alleged first meeting on a state visit to Cuba when Trudeau was prime minister:
“Pierre Trudeau’s and Fidel Castro’s paths crossed for the first time in 1970, when the Canadian government sought to negotiate the exile of members of the FLQ, who had kidnapped British trade commissioner James Cross. Fidel Castro obliged the Canadian PM by providing a refuge, and in a private letter Mr. Trudeau later extended his heartfelt gratitude.
In January, 1976, when it looked as though the United States was about to lift its trade embargo and normalize relations between Washington and Havana, Pierre Trudeau embarked on a state visit to Cuba. Practically from the moment he stepped off his Armed Forces Boeing 707, Mr. Trudeau, his wife Margaret and his newborn son Michel endeared themselves to Fidel Castro and vice-versa. Three days later, it became obvious that the two leaders had become fast friends.”
The National Post is a bit more precise, although the title is half the length of the article: “No, internet, Fidel Castro isn’t Trudeau’s real father. The Canadian prime minister just really, really looks like him” by Tristin Hopper, February 14, 2017, 1:59 PM EST; Last Updated February 14, 2017 6:08 PM EST. Accessed 2 October 2019. Two paragraphs of note:
“Meanwhile, any personal contact between Castro and the Trudeaus was still years away. By early 1971, the only real contact between the prime minister’s office and Cuba had been a 1970 exchange of letters during the October Crisis to arrange the exile of FLQ terrorists.
The spear-fishing trips, the ‘Viva Castro!’ speeches, the glowing descriptions in Margaret and Pierre’s autobiographies; those would all come following Pierre and Margaret Trudeau’s first meeting with Castro in 1976.”
The REAL Story: Pierre and Fidel met in 1960
Sixteen years before their alleged first meeting in 1976, Pierre Elliott Trudeau “encountered” Fidel Castro while apparently only pretending to “fail” in a bid to row a three-man, home-made canoe to Havana.
The true historic moment is revealed in a 1-minute, 25-second clip from Volume I of Pierre Trudeau’s DVD Memoirs, featured at this page along with a transcript.
The voice-over is apparently by Terence McKenna, who according to the production credits at the end of the full-length installment, wrote and narrated the Trudeau Memoirs for this big-production 10-GB epic sold on DVD.
The documentary was produced by Les Productions La Fête Inc. in association with The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and La Société Radio-Canada (the French-language CBC) with the participation of Téléfilm Canada. Trudeau himself, interviewed in studio and filmed revisiting the scenes of his past with old red colleagues, Gérard Pelletier and Fidel Castro, collaborates in this production to commemorate his life.
Someone has put the whole first segment, Trudeau Memoirs V1, at Youtube. The 1960 canoe-trip to Cuba is in that segment @ 36 minutes 24 seconds in. If it’s missing from Youtube, you can view the full-length Volume 1 of the Memoirs here: https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZrrlRkZ5why1k4EY14YrajWlWGWWbSfWDuy
If the canoe clip excerpt is missing from YouTube, you can view it here: https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=XZTvlRkZDMpWknMeme5ODC7FHzkkxLhRt9S7
[ Male Voice-over by Terence McKenna: ]
Some of Trudeau’s travels in the 1950s contributed to his reputation as a radical. He didn’t worry about it. He attended an economics conference in Moscow and wrote about it for Le Devoir.1 He would eventually visit Communist China, and he came here to Cuba in the early days of the Castro regime. All this at a time when anti-Communist hysteria was raging in North America.
His 1961 [sic] attempt to row a gerry-rigged canoe from Florida to Cuba was a source of great amusement to Fidel Castro, whom Trudeau encountered at the time, and with whom he eventually developed a close friendship.
[ A retired Trudeau, at a table with Castro, is heard reminiscing in Spanish. ]
[ Male Voice-over by Terence McKenna continues, clearly interpreting the Spanish conversation: ]
Trudeau was accused of trying to smuggle arms to the Cuban revolutionaries in his canoe.
Castro says it would have been more useful at the time if Trudeau had brought him an aircraft carrier.
[ Trudeau and Fidel embrace and take leave of each other. ]
[ Male Voice-over by Terence McKenna continues: ]
Trudeau’s trips to the Communist world and his reputation as a radical are amusing now; but back then, they had serious consequences.
– END CLIP –
The Year Trudeau met Castro was 1960, and
Here’s the Proof
Terence McKenna says “1961” is the year of Trudeau’s “attempt to row a gerry-rigged canoe from Florida to Cuba”. The year is wrong. It could have been a typographical error, or a slip while McKenna was reading the script he wrote. But, the canoe stunt and the Quebec election of Jean Lesage both took place in 1960. I have an article here on that election: “June 22nd 1960 — the Election of Jean Lesage”. Also see: “The Quebec Elections of 1960 – Lesage Minority ‘Liberals’ Make First Attempt at a Communist Plan”.
Other Trudeau biographers and sources on Trudeau confirm the canoe escapade took place in 1960. Here are some of them:
Max and Monique Nemni, two official biographers of Pierre Trudeau (and two fellow Reds), confirm the year of the canoe escapade was 1960 in Trudeau Transformed: The Shaping of a Statesman 1944-1965. (Volume Two of Trudeau, Son of Quebec, Father of Canada, translated by George Tombs, A Douglas Gibson Book, McClelland & Stewart, 2011) They also identify Trudeau’s two rowing companions:
“With all this excitement, one might think that Trudeau would stay in Quebec, at least until the elections. But no. He threw himself into a crazy scheme, dreamed up and meticulously organized by Alphonse Gagnon, director of Gagnon Frères, a Chicoutimi furniture store. On April 29, 1960, the Key West Citizen of Florida reported that three men — Alphonse Gagnon, Pierre Trudeau, and Val Francoeur — planned to take a canoe from Florida to Cuba in twenty-four hours: ‘The technique calls for one man paddling in conventional fashion while another lies backward in the boat and rows with oars attached to his feet. The third man rests. They plan shifts of two hours on the oars and one resting and will switch positions for each shift.’ These daredevils fortunately took the precaution of being escorted by another boat. On Monday, May 2, the Montreal Star reported the adventure had come to an end: They had covered 50 miles of the 90 miles distance across the rough Florida straights (sic) when they quit Saturday night. The three said they would have continued if the salt water had not put their flashlights out of commission. They feared they might lose their escort boat in the darkness.’ Trudeau returned to Quebec and became active once more in the struggle to bring about democracy in Quebec.”
The millionaires brought flashlights that weren’t water-proof on a sea-going exploit. Sure.
Before we move on, I have to clarify, When the Nemnis say “Trudeau returned to Quebec and became active once more in the struggle to bring about democracy in Quebec,” they mean “industrial democracy,” also called “participation” or “worker control,” the form of communism at that time in Tito’s Yugoslavia and long promoted in Canada by the NDP (Trudeau’s first political party). This is the same “participation” referred to in Quand nous seront vraiment chez nous (I now call my English, “When we are truly on our own”); see my translation of the 1972 PQ manifesto, linked in the sidebar. This is what the “separatists” (communists) have been working on for decades and still is the goal today: third-world Communism for Canada.) Sometimes, things are so bad, all I can do is make a cartoon about them; this link is caricature and satire based on the truth (industrial democracy): Jagmeet Singh, the NDP and World Government.
Back to the canoe. I contacted the Key West Citizen of Florida newspaper, hoping to buy a scan of their article, and any follow-up. However, the Citizen hasn’t got those old issues any more. Library and Archives Canada claims not to have them, either. Local Key West libraries also claimed they were not on microfilm, which despite the listing to 1976 only goes to 1954.
The Montreal Star article quoted by the Nemnis was titled: “Stormy Seas Spell Defeat for Canoeists”. It appeared on Monday May 2nd, 1960 on page 49. The issue is preserved on Microfilm: Roll 664, The Montreal Star, 1960 May 1-15, NJ.FM.821, AMICUS No. 8404664 by Preston Microfilming Services, 2215 Queen St., East, Toronto, Ontario, M4E 1E8.
Robert Wright, in his book, Three Nights in Havana, excerpted for the National Post (Latest Edition) on 28 Apr 2007 as “Halfway to Havana” (Press Reader) notes:
“On the first day of May 1960, just a year after Fidel Castro’s visit to Montreal, two 40-something Canadian millionaires and a 30-something friend set out to paddle a homemade canoe from Key West to Havana.”
The Ottawa Citizen of January 12, 2008 confirms the year as 1960:
“On the first day of May 1960, Trudeau and two other Montrealers tried to paddle a home-made canoe from Key West to Havana. No match for the powerful currents, pounding waves and blistering sun of the Strait of Florida, the three exhausted Canadians agreed to abandon the crossing the next day.”
Trudeau’s other official biographer, John English (fellow member of the CIIA, Canadian branch of the international bankers’ world-government front in London, the RIIA, headquarters of the Rhodes Scholarships—the CFR in the USA being a “sister institute”), confirms the canoe-trip year as 1960:
“Certainly, he made himself difficult to contact — a small canoe in the middle of the ocean could not have been more impossible to reach — as the forces of opposition to Duplessis swelled behind Lesage and his team.
Once the Cuban canoe escapade was over, Trudeau returned to Montreal and wrote an editorial in Cité Libre that appeared before the election of Jean Lesage on June 22, 1960.”
Nino Ricci, in his ‘Extraordinary Canadians: Pierre Elliott Trudeau,’ confirms the canoe escapade took place during the 1960 election campaign in Quebec:
“Even Cite Libre was slipping from him, caught up in a factionalism to which his own anti-nationalist views had given rise. The moment had come for change, and he had not been part of it. When the chance had come to replace the Union Nationale after Duplessis’s death, several of Trudeau’s colleagues and friends had run for the Lesage Liberals as René Lévesque had. Trudeau, however, had been down in Key West during the campaign, attempting to paddle to Cuba in a homemade canoe. Lévesque later claimed that Trudeau, too, had been asked to run, but others said he had never been approached.”
And, one more time: the naive Edith Iglauer, who gushes over Trudeau, is recorded by The Free Library in “Pierre Trudeau: Champion of a Just Society” (Circa 2000):
“The attraction of Cuba for Trudeau began as early as 1960, when he made a legendary if unsuccessful attempt when he was forty with two Montreal friends to row in an experimental canoe from Key West, Florida, to Havana. Trudeau is said to have lain on his back in the vessel, working oars with his feet while his two companions steered and rowed with what would appear in photographs to be traditional oars. The second morning out, about half way across the turbulent Florida Straits, three very seasick men gave up.”
As we now know from his DVD Memoirs, the “attempt” was indeed “successful”: for “Trudeau encountered” Castro at the time.
In his book, Three Nights in Havana, excerpted for the National Post (Latest Edition) on 28 Apr 2007 as “Halfway to Havana”, author Robert Wright sums up the canoe stunt:
“When he [Trudeau] was fished out of the Straits of Florida on that balmy spring day in 1960, he betrayed no disappointment about the failed crossing. ‘That would call for a demonstration of emotion,’ recalled Don Newlands, the cameraman in the shrimp boat, ‘and that was not in him.’”
Trudeau “encountered” Castro on “May Day,” 1960
If Trudeau, according to Newlands, “betrayed no disappointment about the failed crossing,” perhaps he had not been disappointed; because the canoe trip was the front and not the objective; the objective being achieved. And that was for Trudeau to meet Castro at a critical moment in Canada’s history being crafted by these two men. The claim the trip had “failed” would avert all risk of Trudeau’s later being linked with Castro’s FLQ, once it emerged. For, Castro was recruiting and training the terrorists to be loosed on Canada when Trudeau and he had their “encounter” … apparently on “May Day”.
And what is May Day?
Observed in many countries to celebrate the coming of spring, May Day is observed in Russia and related countries in honour of labour. A telegram sent by Jean-Louis Gagnon to a Communist May-Day rally in Montreal on May 1st, 1946 illustrates the importance of May Day to Communists. Here is the English translation published by Alan Stang in the John Birch Society’s offprint of Stang’s April 1st, 1971 “CANADA” article in American Opinion (look for my post, “Singing tomorrows”):
“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”
Personally, I prefer the classic definition: “An internationally recognized distress signal via radiotelephone (from the French m’aider, “help!”)”.
What are the odds that Trudeau and friends were cruising over the Strait to Communist Cuba … on May Day … just as a lark to ridicule the Balseros (more below)?
When Pierre ascended the Throne of Canada, Stang reports he “created Information Canada, named Gagnon to run it at $40,000 a year. … And he (Jean-Louis Gagnon) is a dues-paying member of the Communist Party.”
Fred Rose, a Soviet spy convicted of espionage and jailed for treason was Gagnon’s boss in the Party. Igor Gouzenko, who defected from the Soviet Embassy in Ottawa, revealed that Jean-Louis Gagnon 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. World War II is another kettle of fish. What misguided country would enter a war with Stalin as their ally? But, anyway.
We have, I think, corrected Terence McKenna’s typographical error. The sentence he wrote now reads:
“His 1960 attempt to row a gerry-rigged canoe from Florida to Cuba was a source of great amusement to Fidel Castro, whom Trudeau encountered at the time.”
THE REAL VEHICLE TO HAVANA WAS
THE “ESCORT BOAT” (OBVIOUSLY)
In our final extract above, from “Halfway to Havana,” author Robert Wright confirms that the Nemnis’ “escort boat” for the canoeists was indeed a “shrimp boat”. Shrimp boats off the Keys in 1960 looked like this:
There were only two vehicles on the Straits according to every version of the story: the home-made “gerry-rigged” canoe, and a “shrimp boat”.
Based on that information, there is only one conclusion. The shrimp boat, the escort boat, made it to Havana late in the day on May 1st, 1960. Or Trudeau met Castro far out at sea off the radar.The failed canoe stunt is a fairy tale, a cover-up for the real expedition on the shrimp boat, precisely to meet Castro. The date of that meeting fits in perfectly with the timeline my research is producing. I have Pierre Elliott Trudeau and his communist friends in league with the federal government to revolutionize Quebec by a referendum in the early 1960s. My research post, in development, centers on the false-flag event we call “The Donald Gordon Incident” (November-December 1962). Another name for it might be, the communist mobilization of the non-communist population.
(The “DGI” was scripted by Trudeau, published in his pro-Soviet CITE LIBRE in early 1961, play-acted by Canada’s number one bureaucrat, Donald Gordon, pulled off by the federal government and a parliamentary committee, with Trudeau’s Communist friends running both major French dailies who escalated it with riots and near-riots led by Trudeau’s Marxist law student, Bernard Landry, and by communists in the street. That is how the Reds got a “royal commission” they could use to crack the Constitution and replace it; that’s how the Red carpet was unrolled to bring in the FLQ to sharpen the need to break Confederation. And the reason, as always: You need all the powers to construct a Communist Plan. An independent State of Quebec would have had all the powers. Subscribe and look for it.)
The story told in the DVD Memoirs, that the US Coast Guard suspected the men of trying to “smuggle arms in their canoe” is a cartoon to make you laugh and stop thinking.
Referring once again to author Robert Wright in his excerpt for the National Post “Halfway to Havana”:
“When he [Trudeau] was fished out of the Straits of Florida on that balmy spring day in 1960, he betrayed no disappointment about the failed crossing. ‘That would call for a demonstration of emotion,’ recalled Don Newlands, the cameraman in the shrimp boat, ‘and that was not in him.’”
But, Trudeau wasn’t “disappointed.” The crossing didn’t “fail.” Trudeau’s DVD Memoirs tell us he “encountered” Castro “at the time”.
THE ATMOSPHERE IN CUBA IN 1960
The Trudeau canoe stunt was a gesture of ridicule toward people who were desperately trying to escape the communist-humanist paradise of Fidel Castro. Thousands of Cubans are reported to have drowned in the attempt to flee.
Blogger Richard Martineau, in “Le penchant de Pierre Trudeau et de ses fils pour la tyrannie” (“The fondness of Pierre Trudeau and his sons for tyranny”) describes the Cuba toward which Trudeau and friends were rushing via canoe and shrimp boat in May of 1960. Says Martineau:
En 1960, alors que des milliers de Cubains assoiffés de liberté bravaient la mer à bord d’embarcations de fortune, Trudeau, lui, a fait le chemin inverse : il a tenté de joindre Cuba à bord d’un canot en partance de la Floride !
In 1960, when thousands of Cubans thirsting for liberty braved the sea aboard makeshift rafts, Trudeau was going the other way: he tried to reach Cuba aboard a canoe bound from Florida!
(Rappelons qu’en 1960, on a répertorié 631 condamnations à mort, 146 fusillés et 70 000 prisonniers politiques à Cuba. Pour le respect des droits de la personne, on repassera …)
(Remember that in 1960, there were 631 death sentences, 146 executions by firing squad and 70,000 political prisoners inventoried in Cuba. As to respect for individual rights, we’ll skip it …)
SCHOETERS: FLQ LEADER IN CUBA 1960
Louis Fournier, a Sorbonne-trained French-Canadian journalist and partisan of the Marxist left, called jailed FLQ terrorists “political prisoners” We already know that both Schoeters and René Lévesque met Castro in Montreal at the end of April 1959. Fournier documents the sequel to the Schoeters meeting: the beginning of training in Cuba for Schoeters, a future leader of the first cell of FLQ terrorists. Said Fournier:
“Georges Schœters est une sorte de marxiste humaniste, surtout tiers-mondiste. Il a effectué un voyage à Cuba aux débuts de la révolution, en août 1959, en compagnie d’une douzaine d’étudiants de l’Université de Montréal où il vient de terminer sa scolarité de maîtrise en science économique. Le groupe, invité par l’Institut national de la réforme agraire, a rencontré Fidel Castro et le commandant Camilo Cienfuegos. À l’automne 1959, Schœters retourne à Cuba pour travailler pendant quelques mois à la réforme agraire. Il y rencontre alors Che Guevara.”
“Georges Schœters is a kind of Marxist humanist, above all a third-worldist. He took a trip to Cuba at the beginning of the revolution, in August of 1959, accompanied by 10 students from the Université de Montréal where he had just completed his Masters in Economics.2 The group, as guests of the Instituto Nacional de Reforma Agrariae (National Institute of Agrarian Reform), met Fidel Castro and commandant Camilo Cienfuegos. In the Fall of 1959, Schœters returned to Cuba to work for a few months at agrarian reform. At that time, he met Che Guevara.”
In Last Stop Paris: The Assassination of Mario Bachand and the Death of the FLQ, author Michael McLoughlin places Georges Schoeters in Cuba in 1960. Speaking of others (Raymond Villeneuve, Gaston Collin and André Garand), McLoughlin says:
“Three weeks later, the three would-be revolutionaries ran out of money and were taken under the wing of ICAP, the Cuban Institute for the Support of Peoples, the organization that in 1960 gave hospitality to Georges Schoeters, two years before he became a founder of the FLQ. They were given free room and board and 250 pesos a month. There was, of course, a price for such generosity. ICAP was an arm of the Cuban Tourist Bureau, which was an arm of the General Intelligence Directorate (DGI), the Cuban intelligence service, so it was not a typical tourist agency. One of its roles was to invite to Cuba foreigners who had the potential to become agents of influence after they returned home.”
Pierre Elliott Trudeau met Castro on May Day in 1960 while the first cell of the Communist Front de Libération du Québec was being hand-picked and groomed in Cuba. Why admit it now? At the end of his life, his vanity got the better of him. He wanted to leave a note at the scene of his crime, in grand contempt for those he had betrayed. The victims he had charmed with his lies would surely never notice it.
This admission, in Trudeau’s DVD Memoirs, shatters the Trudeau myth. He manipulated his way to power to consummate from above the treason he commenced below.
Pierre had a busy year in 1960. First, he met Castro who was organizing the FLQ to attack Canada. Then he got the Reds to vote Liberal when Jean Lesage was planning a communist regime for Quebec and a referendum to secede to do it. Then Pierre went to Beijing to celebrate the victory of the Reds imposing their power on mainland China. That was not a State visit. That was a personal visit by Communist Pierre, supporting his own cause.
This is the dictator that Pierre and Margaret found charming and sexy when they allegedly “first met” him, the year Castro was filmed below (1976):
(We Warn You)
[Fidel Castro:] “If the Cuban government were to dedicate time to doing terrorism, and to respond with terrorism to terrorism, we believe that we would really be very effective terrorists.”
[Audience: wild applause (compulsory)]
“Let no one be mistaken. If we were to dedicate ourselves to terrorism, with all certainty, we would be very effective. But the fact that the Cuban Revolution has never applied terrorism, doesn’t mean that we never will.
We warn you.”
[Credits:] Discurso de Fidel Castro por el 15to aniversario del MININT en el Teatro Carlos Marx, La Haban, 6 de junio del 1976.
Discourse of Fidel Castro on the 15th anniversary of the MININT, in the Karl Marx Theatre at Havana on 6 June 1976.
The Ministero del Interior (known as MININT) is Cuba’s state agency responsible for internal security.
In Canada on 26 April 1959, Belgian immigrant Georges Schoeters met Fidel Castro at the Montreal Airport. Schoeters would go three times to Cuba to be trained by Castro to set up the Front de libération du Québec (FLQ) and recruit other terrorists.
English translation by cubacenter The Center for a Free Cuba (CFC) at YouTube.
MUSIC: Life is So Short.
Artist: Shane Newville
Album: Beats Collection Vol. 1
Thanks, again, to cubacenter, for the great translation. A decade later, it still packs a punch. This video was produced at Montreal on 21 April in 2009.
For more information on the planned end of Canada, visit:
HABEAS CORPUS CANADA
1. Trudeau’s 1952 7-part series on the Moscow conference is now available in English from NoSnowInMoscow, and also at AntiCommunist Archive: I’m Back From Moscow, by Pierre Elliott Trudeau (1952).
2. “A very interesting Belgian source online who did in-depth research published in 2013, says that Schoeters finished his Masters while in prison for an FLQ bombing that took a life. Christophe Lamfalussy of La Libre Belgique says that on early release, Schoeters was put on a plane and expelled from Canada on 25 September 1967. Then, in 1968, (translation): “Schoeters obtained his Masters in Economics from the Université de Montréal because he had been able to pursue his studies in prison.” (“Georges Schoeters, le Belge qui voulait libérer le Québec”). Schoeters therefore did not have a Masters when he went to work for Castro. We have a battle of sources here, and frankly, I’m more inclined to Mr. Lamfalussy because unlike Fournier, the Belgian doesn’t appear to have an agenda. Lamfalussy in French: “Schoeters obtient cette année-là de l’université de Montréal une maîtrise en sciences économiques car, en prison, il avait pu poursuivre ses études.”
– 30 –