Whisper (Part I)

On the occasion of Canada's federal elections of 14 October 2008, this video reveals that a "secret committee" involving Federal Ministers from Quebec in the Lester Pearson government of Canada, under control of Power Corporation, resolved to CREATE a separatist party. That party was to be the PARTI QUEBECOIS. The secret committee included Pierre Elliott Trudeau, just a few months before his first election as Prime Minister of Canada. Additional information on this subject is available online at:

http://www.freewebs.com/habeascorpuscanada/documents/vol1no1october2008.pdf
or in DOC format:
http://www.freewebs.com/habeascorpuscanada/documents/vol1no1october2008.doc
or in HTML:
http://www.freewebs.com/habeascorpuscanada/documents/vol1no1october2008.html

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• election
• elections
• canada
• 2008
• 14
• october
• NAU
• SPP
• Quebec
• separatism
• rene
• levesque
• independance
• sovereignty

[1curieux]

@crazyforcanada So if I understand your reasoning, if we write in the Constitution that blue eyed people are minions of the devil and need to be killed, the rest of the world will just stand aside because it would be fully legal to hunt down such people in our country? The Constitution has its limitations and secession is one of those where, since one entity rejects the laws of the other, the UN and international law steps in (eg: Canada sending troops to Croatia)

[crazyforcanada]

@1curieux - The Constitution of Canada is the SUPREME LAW of Canada, and any law [or measure] that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect. This is true whether Canada has the population of California, or the population of Orangeville, Ontario. The Constitution exerts the law for Canada, I don't care what other people do, but the Constitution VOIDS NAFTA for Canada. What has the rest of the world to do with it, dear?

[crazyforcanada]

@crazyforcanada - NAFTA can be judicially nullified as the basis of North American Union, & there is plenty of evidence that it is, including open statements, i.e., of Henry Kissinger in 1993, & of Robert Pastor more recently writing for the CFR in a piece called "North America's Second Decade" in which identifies NAFTA as "an economic constitution for North America". Canada's governments have no power to bind Canada into any kind of "constitution" with any country or body, whether USA or UN.

[crazyforcanada]

@crazyforcanada - The USA has a "Monroe Doctrine" by which they claim a right to extend their own constitution to all North American territory. However, the Constitution of Canada was designed in 1865 expressly to repulse all such attempts by setting up a permanent, non-cessible nation which no elected member and no officer of the Constitution, including the Queen, can override to authorize annexation, because [a] there is no power in the constitution to do so; [b] as it's forbidden.

[crazyforcanada]

@1curieux - No, it hasn't. Not all countries adhere to these types of international institutions. Not all countries CAN adhere, where their own constitution adopts a form of government deemed to be the superior power on that soil such that no other power can be raised above it, even with its own consent. The NAFTA courts are illegal and unconstitutional for Canada; notably because NAFTA isn't really a trade deal, it's the basis of a political and economic merger with the USA & Mexico.

[1curieux]

@crazyforcanada No offense meant but Canada is merely the population of California, I don't see us as that significant on the world scene as we'd like to believe we are.

[1curieux]

@crazyforcanada International laaw has no precedence? Why the internatonal tribunal then? The people tried there sure acted in accordance to their local governments rules! Why do we have a NAFTA tribunal to settle disputes then if the USA is free to act as they want in their country? The constitution of Canada is not the word of God. Gees, that people say they are for or against something is ok, but saying it is illegal or merely impossible is something else.

[crazyforcanada]

@crazyforcanada - The Badinter Standards are disguised in the Supreme Court of Canada's "secession" reference as so-called "constitutional" "principles" to compel all the provinces and territories to "secede" into the EU-style North American Union being built now under the SPP. The Supreme Court did this as high treason to make 'secession' appear to be "constitutional" because it knows that international law has no precedence over our domestic constitution. This fraud will be legally overturned.

[crazyforcanada]

@1curieux - the reason the UN has "precedents" is that it needs to use them to destroy large nation-states to refederate them under the EU system spreading to all continents as the basis of world government UNDER THE UN. The so-called "precedents" are artificially contrived, notably the "Badinter Applicable Standards" of the Arbitration Commission which forcibly completed the UN-EU-sponsored disintegration of Yugoslavia begun by the USA.

[1curieux]

@crazyforcanada My post was a reply to a (somewhat racist) comment made by boogyjuggy and not directly related to your video. But regarding the video... well, its 2011 and still no annexation. And as for the Constitution being the Final and Definitive Law, the UN has rules for separation (look at all the precedents.)