THE MEDIA’S “NON-PERSON”
You Be The Judge
I'm confused....according to every Canadian I know Canada is perfect.:uh:
Posted 22 January 2006 - 05:39 AM
S T A T E M E N T O F F A C T S
re: Brian Mulroney Imposed 50 Metre "KEALEY LAW"
(by Order in Council) on Parliament Hill in Ottawa
Conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney's then Minister of Public Works,
Roch LaSalle, demanded bribes of $5,000 cash (for himself) plus a further
5% ($8,000,000 - for the Prime Minister and his Cabinet) from a development
company MICOT INC. At the time Glen Kealey's $160 million hi-tech MICOT
construction project was under way in Hull, Quebec.
In return, Roch LaSalle promised a "concrete gesture of support" for MICOT.
Glen Kealey, MICOT company's President and then a "Director" of the Tory Party in the riding of Hull-Aylmer, immediately protested both bribe requests, and as well, refused outright to pay politicians any bribe what-so-ever.
1987 - 88 Kealey's MICOT partners later joined with the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) in a failed court attempt contrived to remove Kealey from his position as the legally recognized President and CEO of MICOT INC. However, due to the existence of an unimpeachable "Unanimous Shareholders Agreement" between the partners signed at the incorporation of the MICOT partnership, Kealey easily won the court challenge. Unfortunately however, MICOT did not survive this public courtroom dispute. The futuristic project, along with its 5,000 jobs, died "in the egg". The MICOT site was repossessed by the mortgage holder and immediately developed (by Bell Canada - it is presently Bell Canada's regional headquarters).
Further, Kealey witnessed and publicly protested to the national electronic media, the national electronic media, the outright rigging by Quebec Tories, of the Hull-Aylmer Tory riding association Presidency. This misdeed made possible a "pre-selection" of a federal election candidate. 79 votes were collected from only 72 people present in the room. The two main
vote-riggers, Pierre-Claude Nolin and Fernand Simard, were later richly rewarded with "positions at the public trough", by Prime Minister Mulroney. Nolin became a "Senator-for-life" while Simard was named Co-Chairmain of the "unbiased" R.C.M.P. “Public Complaints Commission”.
(cont.) When Kealey reported both events, the requests for bribes and the rigging of elections, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (R.C.M.P.) simply refused to investigate even though Kealey submitted to and successfully passed a poly-graph (lie detector).
Summer 1988 Mulroney called the election for November 22, 1988 and both Kealey and Blais-Grenier ran, and lost, as indepenents. Brian Mulroney due to the infusion of $53 million illegally contributed by international bankers and their trans-national corporations in support of the "FREE TRADE" issue (i.e. National AIDS), easily bought his second election victory.
Evidently, due to the deceitful system employed by federal parties of pre-selecting their candidates as described above, in concert with the ridicule foisted upon independent campaigns by a controlled national media, Canadians outside Quebec were, once again,forced to choose from one of the crooks who ran for the mainstream political parties.
As well, most Quebecers straddled a nationalist fence and elected a number of
CLOSET SEPARATISTS whom, like by magic, always appear as candidates in
"federal" parties in Quebec, at the time of elections.
Nov. 22, 1988
Kealey observed enough crime to comprehend that the "SYSTEM" did not function for
Canadians but against them. He decided to turn his "weakness" into power. He chose to become a "National Town-crier" on the national town square - Parliament Hill, in Ottawa. Since one cannot be successfuly sued for liable when one reports criminal activity by politicians because it is "in the public's interest", Kealey began a thousand day vigil against corruption on Parliament Hill. Kealey met with a large number of "insiders". These included M.P.'s, House of Commons security staff, members of the Quebec Provincial Police, R.C.M.P. and C.S.I.S.. Most helped Kealey expand and develop his growing suspicion about the existence of a vast "conspiracy - to cease and limit police
political corruption investigations". Spring 1989 With the first cold winter on the Hill behind him, Kealey's unpaid "job" in Ottawa finally came to the attention of the Canadian public. A reporter, an "outsider" from Toronto, Mrs. Stevie Cameron of the Globe & Mail was first to report on his activities. At first,
not realising her solid connections to Canada's Military Security Service (C.S.E.),Kealey had believed her that she wanted to expose all political corruption. However, subsequent events proved she had been selected by our controllers. Cameron was the only reporter positioned to discredit Mulroney nationally, "without causing them any collateral damage". This she did by focusing her audience on what she claimed he represented - an "aberration".
Posted 22 January 2006 - 05:41 AM
Nov. 1, 1989
Following discussions on viable court tactics with Liberal MP John Nunziata, a well publicized member of the "Rat Pack", Kealey obtained an "appointment with justice" on Nov. 8, 1989 - for the purpose of "laying an information". It accused the R.C.M.P. command of "ceasing and limiting investigations", and, many Tory politicians along with their aids of "conspiray - to commit fraud upon the government".
Immediately, the R.C.M.P. top brass responded with a call to government
departments and agencies to meet, on an urgent basis, in order to discuss
the problem of "the lone protestor on Parliament Hill".
Nov. 8, 1989
It was on this same date that both of these events - Kealey's first "appointment with justice" and the R.C.M.P.'s first meeting with "interested parties" - occurred in different locations, in Ottawa.
At their meeting the R.C.M.P., stated they had received a direction from the Speaker of the House of Commons in response to a complaint reeived from their "boss", Doug Lewis, the Solicitor General, requested that a change be made to the Standing Regulations on the use of Parliament Hill". Most lawyers from other departments vehemently objected. Such a move against Kealey, they said, would be illegal and "unconstitutional", and unacceptable limit placed on the freedoms of people of Canada. Mulroney disregarded these stern legal warnings and ordered the change be made to the law anyhow.
Meanwhile, at the Ottawa courthouse, Lynn Coulter agreed to hold a public 507 hearing (Case #1) to determine if sufficient evidence existed to allow Kealey's explosive charges to go forward. February 1990 After the Christmas break, when Lynn Coulter began her Section 507 Hearing(Case #1), she inexplicably overturned her own decision to hold the 507 hearing in public and declared "it will be held in secret" (in camera). The national news media immediately appealed her "change of heart" and her new decision was son reversed by the Supreme Court of Ontario. The section 507 hearing was further delayed, until the fall of 1990, because the R.C.M.P. appealed in turn, this time to the Ontario Court of Appeal. Here one cannot allow oneself be mislead by the actions of the national media brass, to erroneously conclude, by the media filing an objection to the R.C.M.P. appeal, that they were in fact disagreeing with the practice of holding secret 507 hearings. Just the opposite. These media bosses understand the origin of their funds. For the media, money, and subsequently profits and bonuses, are the result of the sale of advertising to their clients, and, that the richest media advertisers are banks, governments and trans-national corporations. Media are essentially the private properties of the same international bankers (Rothschilds) who control us. In fact, national governments serve international bankers foremost; as "money launderers". Otherwise, were it not for "their" government's ability to tax away "their" profits, to later return "their" money to "them"alone - when it's paid back as "interest" on "our" phoney national debt -- "their" government and corporate properties would come under intense pressure to share "their" enormous cash surpluses, with deserving employees and minority shareholders.
The true purpose of the appeal by the police brass and subsequent challenge
by the controlled media was first, to buy time for the controller's "think-tanks"
and second, for all time, to entrench in precedent making ruling the fact that
these 507 hearings would always be held in secret; so that any evidence
brought forward in this venue would be forever kept from public view. This
appeal served to finally close a small loop-hole that benefitted ordinary people,
in the controllers legal industry.
This is the day that will live in Canadian infamy.
Brian Mulroney's cabinet had brutally discounted all of the objections raised by
the government's own lawyers and finally imposed the Kealey Law by means of a police state type "Order in Council"
March 19, 1990
(cont.) At, following Question Period in the House, the R.C.M.P. brass ordered that the new 50 metre regulation be enforced. Kealey had become too great a threat to our corrupt politicians. Glen Kealey was arrested and detained (Case #2).
Although he was quickly offered his immediate release in return for an undertaking not to return to Parliament Hill, Kealey refused a conditional release. Acquiescence under duress, in Kealey's view, would have created an unwarranted and unconstitutional precedent. He was therefore held in jail for 4 nights and 5 days.
Many times he was handcuffed and his ankles were chained to other prisoners
charged with murder. Other inmates started fights. Concerned politicians visited him. Kealey used this opportunity to speak to Canadians, on open-line radio, across Canada. Meanwhile, some Liberal and New Democratic members of the House protested in Kealey's place on the Hill and bus loads of other protestors prepared to come to Ottawa. The R.C.M.P. commissioner relented under this and other public pressure (telephone calls, faxes, telegrams and letters) and ordered the police to refrain from any further arrests. On Friday, March 23, 1990, Kealey was released from jail, albeit over the forceful objections of the R.C.M.P.. Kealey immediately returned to the Hill.
Kealey promptly obtained a Legal Aid Certificate and hired a lawyer, Mr. Todd McKendrick,to launch a lawsuit for his damages, in the Federal Court (CASE #3).
Ontario Legal Aid limited Kealey's claim to a maximum $49,000 in damages while other courts have, in the past, awarded damaged of $18,750 per 24 hrs. of illegal detention -or $75,000 for four days.
As Kealey would later discover this was not the only time the servile legal industry would conspire against Canadians, to limit the exposure of corrupt politicians and to manage and control lawsuits on behalf of their hidden sponsors (the 300 members of the Rothschild "extended" family of international bankers who, in fact, secretly direct the actions of the Canadian government from behind the scene).
Posted 22 January 2006 - 05:44 AM
July 1990 As a result of the continuous pressure originating from all sectors of the Canadian public, a meeting of the Joint Committee of the House and Senate on Regulations unanimously demanded that the Kealey Law be repealed. They declared the new regulation an abuse of power and clearly unconstitutional.
Summer 1990 Kealey apparently became the target of a "hidden agenda", when two former business associates came forward and insisted in paying for a lawyer who, they said, would help with his Section 507 hearing (Case #1). Robert Wakefield is the lawyer they hired. His links to Ontario Legal Aid (he chairs the Committee) and to the Law Society (he tests lawyers during their Bar exams) worried Kealey from the beginning, however, because he was being paid by people claiming to be close friends, Kealey had lowered his guard. However, as if a BIG HAND was watching over Kealey, Bob Wakefield's real agenda (managing the case so that only LaSalle would be charged) became increasingly clear. Wakefield was unceremoniously dumped by Kealey. A second lawyer, one Arthur Coggan, was immediately slotted into place and paid, by Kealey's so-called "friends".
Following the request made by the House and Senate Joint Committee on Regulations,Kim Campbell, then Minister of Justice, announced that the government was repealing the Kealey Law and would not proceed with the case against Glen Kealey (ie: Disobeying a police officer in the conduct of his duty Case #2).
A decision on the R.C.M.P. appeal of the earlier decision by the Supreme Court of Ontario, to close the Section 507 hearing to the public (Case #1), was announced. The Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the Commissioner and ordered the hearing be held in secret. This decision enshrined the in-camera (secret) nature of all future Section 507 hearings.
As well, in obious conflict of interest, Kealey's new lawyer had in the interim period,been hired by 3 members of the R.C.M.P. to represent them before the
Marin Inquiry on police actics. The Section 507 hearing (Case #1) was again
delayed to June 6 1991. Kealey, once he had again clearly established his second lawyer's conflict, had no alternative but to dismiss him too. Subsequently this lawyer, Arthur Coggan, refused to refund $5,000 of his retainer, although in many other opinions he had not earned it. The second $10,000 retainer had been donated by "another friend of Kealey's" who, surprisingly to all then became a major supplier to the government. He did not object to the fee. Significantly, the decision to choose Arthur Coggan, the second lawyer picked to present Kealey's case against the Tories, had been made by Kealey's former business lawyer.
(cont.) Later, it was also discovered that Kealey's former business lawyer, Ken Gibson, also represented an important Tory cabiner minister in matters relating to the minister's business affairs. It then became evident to Glen Kealey that
the entire process of choosing the lawyers, who supposedly were there
"to assist him" in his Section 507 (Case #1) had, in all likelihood, been
orchestrated by elements of a secret "brotherhood" of "common interests"
who had conspired from the outset to do just the opposite.
Jan. 15, 1991
Following the outbreak of hostilities in the Gulf War, the R.C.M.P. grabbed this second opportunity circumvent the will of parliament - to unilaterally re-instate the Kealey Law, on Parliament Hill. The R.C.M.P. by using
the false pretext of the need to add security on the Hill, a member of the
force approached Kealey and requested his co-operation "only for the
duration of the Gulf war". Kealey was requested, and naively agreed,
to remain beyond the barricades ("temporarily erected") on the Hill.
Jan. 26, 1991
The end of the Gulf war was first declared by the U.S.A. and the U.N. and then announced on CNN. Kealey immediately informed the R.C.M.P. of
his plan to return to his original spot beyond the temporary barricade.
He was denied permission. Officers stated they were reneging on their
earlier promise and Kealey was told the barricades would remain
indefinitely. Kealey reconfirmed his intent to regain his spot - no later
than the next day. Feb. 27, 1991 Kealey returned to his pre-Gulf war position on the Hill and was unceremoniously arrested. After being charged he was released on a promise to reappear in court for trial.
Feb. 28, 1991 Kealey again returned to his original spot across the street from the west entrance to the centre block only to be re-arrested. This time he was held in jail overnight and told he would be tried before a judge alone atthe next morning. Being unable to retrieve his files Kealey had no choice but to accept a lawyer from the Legal Aid list. He chose Richard Bosada, a lawyer whom he had met once before. Bosada had offered his legal services "free of charge if need be" just for the chance to assist Kealey at the section 507 Hearing (Case #1).
Mar. 1, 1991 A "trial" took place with regards to the charges ofcombined.No evidence was presented to the court that proved Kealey had broken any law. To the contrary the court was told Kealey was not a threat. This was confirmed by the R.C.M.P. officer. But the politically appointed judge, Maria Linhares de Souza had already been given firm instructions. Kealey was declared guilty by her "of disobeying a police officer" and was sentenced to one year's probation. Counsel Bosada promised he would appeal (he lied).
Kealey told the political judge, to her face, that he would return to his spot on
Mar. 27, 1991 Canadian ships had returned from the Gulf and were anchored in Halifax harbour.
As usual, true to his word, Kealey returned to his spot on the Hill and was
arrested once more. However, this time Kealey took the additional precaution
of having the entire event publicized and video taped. The video tapes reveal
to all who care about justice and democracy. The police acted as if they were
law makers instead of being the enforcers of laws made by Parliament.
Kealey was subsequently booked (Case # 4). However, trial was postponed,
pending the appeal promised to the court on March 1, 1991, by Counsel Bosada.
June 6, 1991 Section 507 Hearing (Case #1) began hearing witnesses. Thirteen key witnesses were called to testify during a sixteeen day period that ended
with a decision, on July 16, 1991. Criminal charges were laid, by JP Coulter,
against e a c h of the sixteen police and political people accused by
Posted 22 January 2006 - 05:46 AM
"Highlights of TESTIMONY before JP LYNN COULTER
Suzanne Blais-Grenier (former Cabinet Minister)
- Blais-Grenier testied that she joined the PC,s in March 1984, beame a candidate in July 1984 and was elected Sept. 4, 1984
- Blais-Grenier served as Minister of Environment from Sept. 16, 1984 until Aug. 1985, when she was demoted, purportedly over an expense account involving a trip to Paris, to the post of Minister of State - Transport, where she served until Dec. 31, 1985. She was, during this entire period, the political Minister responsible for the entire Island of Montreal. Her difficulties with government policy became a source of public debate, when she disagreed openly with her cabinet colleagues over the shut-down of an ESSO oil refinery, on the island.
-Blais-Grenier became aware of kick-backs almost immediately as she had received information on this, "from many sources". She believed that there was insufficient split between politics and the awarding of contracts and could not understand why Mulroney did not put a stop to this practice. Although "patronage" was a central question when they took over and some Ministers agreed with that course of action, the only talk on the matter was on the question of "good or bad patronage", the difference being only - who benefied most, a TORY or someone else?
- Blais-Grenier testified that Roch LaSalle described himself as "The Mininster of Patronage", and that Mulroney regularly promised caucus a new code of ethics, but he never "really" delivered. Contracts were given only to those close to "political organizers". Big contracts were always only given by the PMO.
- Blair-Grenier believed that Frank Moores and his firm GCI had influence on contracting far beyond what she thought the norm should be. His representatives had assisted in department committee meetings that dealt with the "policy of contracting", and became aware of sensitive information which would give his company an advantage, when that policy was later translated into a business contract. The Deputy Minister even left the Department of Transport to join GCI. Moores' group was often recommended by Civil Servants because they "have an ear in the PMO". Many lobbying firms did not exist before 1984 - until they were created "by friends of the Prime Minister".
- Blais-Grenier testified that only Bernard Roy, the Prime Minister's Chief of Staff, controlled contracting. Only Roy could approve big contracts - not the Civil Servants. "He was much more important than any Minister".
- Blair-Grenier knew that a "secret PC Fund" existed. It was funded from an additional 5% added to contracts and the money that was collected in that way was routed or diverted off-shore (she was told Luxembourg), where it was controlled by Bernard Roy and...by both Senators Charbonneau and Bazin. She was told the money was for the PM's retirement or for Mulroney's secret PC fund. "Short lists" were identified from longer lists, 5% was built into the contract. Blais-Grenier believed civil servants had to know, as 4 or 5 bidders were being told to "take back your bid, the contract is already given ...you will get yours".
- Blais-Grenier testified that P-C Nolin always brought up his father-in-law's engineering firm, "they were very active bidders". Later, "when there were rumours of something about to go PUBLIC, Nolin set up a lobbying firm with another friend of the PM". Much to the PM's dismay, roch LaSalle had also established his own competing operation called, Intergestion DG but the Big Guys were always Roy, Charbonneau and Bazin and in Quebec, Michel Cote. "For me it was always the group of the PM and the LaSalle group". The areas of most activity were Defence, Public Transport, Spply & Services, and Public Works before and after the departure of Roch LaSalle. After an investigation into the corrupt practices of the government, Lucien Bouchard (the so-called Mr. Clean), confirmed her own view. However an election in 1988 prevented him from obtaining a "code of ethics". Later he joined the BQ.
- Blais-Grenier believed that "at some level, the RCMP is as corrupt as the politicians". They would enter her apartment without her permission and tried to "bug" her riding office. They were like "an eye, without a mandate". If they would be "equally zealous" when investigating the higher level politician, as they are with the lower ranks, they would have more success. "The RCMP do not expose crime at that level, they PROTECT POWER."
- Blais-Grenier said in her opinion that problem stems from the activities of about 30 individuals, mostly in the ranks of aides to Cabinet Ministers, Mandarins and Lobbyists. Here the Prime Minister has all the power, there are no checks and balances like in the United States. The system really is a dictatorship, when we call for an inquiry, we are expelled. Peter White was Mulroney's trouble-shooter. "My mortal sin was that I did not play the game". Corruption exists in Ontario as well, simply because "that's where most of the BIG money is".
- Blais-Grenier believes the solution to the problem lies in a Royal Commission, called to investigate contracting, without pointing the finger at any individual. That, in her opinion, would attract the witnesses who know the facts, but who are afraid of the ramifications of Criminal process.
Posted 22 January 2006 - 05:48 AM
"Highlights of TESTIMONY before JP LYNN COULTER
Frank Majeau (former Executive-Assistant)
- Majeau described his role as that of "special assistant and senior advisor" to the Minister of Public Works, Roch LaSalle. He admitted to a criminal record for an "assault" dating back to the early 1980's. Majeau once operated an agency named Prestige Entertainment in Toronto, during 1984. The agency supplied topless dancers to Striptease clubs in Ontario and Quebe. (His partner at the time was Real Simard, a Mafia hit-man. They had operated with the full blessing of the Cotroni Family in Montreal and of the Johnny Papalia gang, in Hamilton).
- Majeau testified that during 1979 he led, at Roch LaSalle's request, a team of five businessman including himself, J-C Salvail, Luc Beaulieu, Richard Leduc, and Dr. St. Piere, a psychiatrist, who conspired together in an attempted bribe request. Accompanied on their trips by RCMP officer Denis Lapointe (for security reasons) they met in St. Louis with both Presidents of McDonell Douglas and General Dynamics, asking each of them, in turn, for $10 million. This was to be paid to them, on behalf of Roch LaSalle. In return for the kickback, the bribe was intended to guarantee the purchase from one manufacturer or the other, of the huge 5 to 12 billion dollar fighter plane contract. The team also wanted a further ongoing kickback of 5%, added to future purchases of parts and labour. The plan was abandoned later, only when the Joe Clark Tory government of the day was defeated in a non-confidence vote, resulting in an election call. The TORIES lost the election, to the TRUDEAU LIBERALS.
- Majeau testified that Denis Lapointe had headed the RCMP's Montreal Economics Crimes Unit. Denis Lapointe was a childhood friend and was fully aware of the purpose of their joint trips. He was used in situations where he could identify other members of the RCMP and had joined this team of fraud artists, with the apparent blessing of the R.C.M.P. BRASS. He would always bring along the latest electronic devices normally utilised by the RCM to "sweep" rooms for any hidden listening device, considering they might well be "bugged or otherwise listened to" by the FBI, while on their many visits into the USA. (Insp. Denis Lapointe was arrested recently (1987), on 11 counts of accepting a benefit ($500,000 in one case alone), from suspects he was assigned to investigate. At his secret trial, a guilty plea was negotiated on one count only and Lapointe was sentenced to 180 days of community work. Inspector Raymond Berube later replaced Lapointe in Montreal.)
.....[mind-boggling info...Anyone interested will have to contact Glen Kealey directly]
- Majeau testified about a discussion he once had with Roch LaSalle about the time Mulroney agreed to pay all of roch's outstanding debts. It happened just after the election of 1984 (and following the multiple break-ins that were detected at PC headquarters, at the PC Canada Fund, at the office of the deceased Rodrigue Pageau and the offices of soon to die, Roger Nantel, in Montreal). LaSalle met with Mulroney's accountant in Quebec City (Michel Cote) and was relieved of his entire 1984 ($300,000 - mostly gambling) debt load, before being appointed debt-free, Minister of Public Works. Majeau agreed with Michel Gravel, that LaSalle would use his family member, in his obvious attempt to launder his funds, by paying cash for labour and materials during the construction of his house.
Posted 22 January 2006 - 05:50 AM
Highlights of TESTIMONY before JP LYNN COULTER
Insp. Jean-Pierre Witty [RCMP-SFIU]
- Witty's background included joining the Commercial Crimes Section in 1978, the Special Federal Investigations Unit in 1985, moving to "A" division at RCMP Headquarters during 1988 and finally back to 400 Cooper St. Ottawa, with the SFI Unit, in 1991.
- Witty testified that he was "preoccupied by the names and contents of the files", requested by Kealey. "I had raised the issue with the CROWN and met with them at least three times, for about 2-2-1/2-3 hrs., each time. I made my superiors aware of the sensitive nature of the files. One file contains 8 boxes. I had some discussion with my superiors on the type of evidence I would give. I sought legal advice about my position and about the sensitivity of the files. I retained Barbara McIsaac (Justice Dept. lawyer) as my counsel. I gave her a retainer"
(During a break, taken when McIsaac had been ordered to "elect" whom she represented - either the officers personally or the Section 507 Hearing interests of the RCMP on the whole - Mrs. McIsaac was overheard speaking to Inspector raymond Berube, who in turn responded, "I have never heard of a witness being represented by counsel, I don't want to perjure myself")
- Witty confirmed that Kealey had successfully passed a polygraph about the allegation he had made, about how Roch LaSalle had asked him for a bribe. Witty also testified that in 1985, he Witty, had sought charges against LaSalle, during the Gravel investigation, but that he had been convinced by Crown Prosecutor Valmont Beaulieu in Hull (promoted soon after the Gravel "guilty plea" and now a judge), that there was insufficient evidence. (There never exists sufficient evidence for a politically appointed Crown, or for the RCMP brass for that matter, who are intent only on "Protecting Power"). Witty agreed that Suzanne Levesque (daughter of Gerald D. and Bourassa's political fixer in the Quebec Ministry of Justice), may have had discussions with the Chief Prosecutor in Hull, about the Gravel case. (Later Premier Rene Levesque's son would rescue Senator Michel Cogger). Witty also stated "if I had a sworn statement from Michel Gravel I would have laid charges against LaSale". (When he subsequently received such a statement Witty still did not lay charges).
Posted 22 January 2006 - 05:52 AM
Witty testified that he carried out a nine month long RCMP investigation, because he believed in the accusation that Bernard Roy, Mulroney's Chief of Staff, had "trafficked in influence", during the negotiations that led to a lease renewal for J-P Tessier, the owner of Place Vincent Massey. (The rent had tripled, even though there remained seven years still to run in the existing lease and, that the Government owned a very favourable "option to purchase" clause, which was not renewed in the new lease. (Dropping this cluase from the new lease transferred equity in the building of approximately $50-80 million, from the Government to the owner). Inspector Witty testified that he could find "no motive", although knew roy had been Tessier's own incorporation lawyer, in "private life". Also, that the Assistant Deputy Minister, Andre Perrier, had prepared "the purchase order" and recommended against the new lease. This sort of activity, Witty said, was "not a unique case, this was done across Canada" (the Federal Government alone, now leases space in more than 5,000 buildings, in Canada.) Although the evidence was clear, that the pressure on Roch LaSalle to complete this deal and, another scheme as well, known as Le Bourg du Fleuve in Trois-Rivieres involving the same people, had originated from Bernard Roy himself, Inspector JP Witty never once questioned Roy, during the entire 9 month investigation.
- Witty testified that, in the spring of 1985, former Premier of Newfoundland Frank Moores a personal friendnd of the Prime Minister [Mulroney], had formed a company in which he was associated with Craig Dobbin, a Newfoundland millionaire, and JP Tessier of Montreal (owner of Place Vincent Massey and Bernard Roy's friend - see above). They both had attempted to purchase two new, but to date, still empty buildings; Place Louis St. Laurent - from Pierre Bourques, and 50 O'Conner - from Metroolitan Life Insurance. On the one hand Bernard roy, through his intermediary P-C Nolin, the then Chief of Staff at Public Works Canada, would stop the potential tenants from taking up residence in the buildings in question, while on the other hand, approaches were being made to the owners (who by this time, and to the buyers benefit, would find themselves in a tight financial bind). Offers to purchase these properties were presented (80 million was offered for 50 O'Connor - also see role of lawyer Gary Smith, later found dead, after "falling" face first into the bottom of his empty swimming pool). When later, because of ongoing RCMP investigations, their preferred plan fell through, they would apparently instinctively move to a back-up scheme, the owners had hired the same lobbyists to assist them find suitable, high-paying government tenants for these buildings (see list - Tenants 50 O'Connor; and the expensive leasing arrangements entered into by the government at Place Louis St. Laurent). Many of these same lobbying firms, along with their contractor-clients, have as well, "coincientally", taken up space in the same O'Connor building (makes one wonder who pays rent)
- Witty testified to having "some knowledge" of Senator Guy Charbonneau's role, linking him to a "secret PC" bank account at the Imperial Bank of Commerce on Dorchester Blvd., in Montreal. He described Senator Charbonneau as a "fundraiser".
Posted 22 January 2006 - 05:53 AM
Highlights of TESTIMONY before JP LYNN COULTER
Emillien Maille (former RCMP "agent")
- Maille knew of Michel Deschne's role at National Defence, in support of Roch LaSalle, and of his dislike for P-C Nolin, whom he planned to "get rid of". Mrs. Deschenes was Gravel's secretary. She spoke of a "Plot".
- Maille was hired by PROVIGO and MEDI-SERVICE, 1986-88.
- Maille's contract included a commission of 3/4% on food and 1% on medical supplies, on all sales to government and institutions.
- Senator Guy Charbonneau's secretary was the wife of Michel Laurent, the President of Medi-Service (PROVIGO). Mr. Laurent once suggest that Senator Charbonneau was certain to be arrested, if the RCMP ever raided his wife's files, which were located at their home.
- Maille stated Gravel called daily to say "your business is coming", but it never arrived.
- Maille dissatisfied with lack of business complained first to Gerald Pichette the riding president and then on Dec. 5, 1985, to P-C Nolin.
- Maille interviewed in early 1986, by RCMP Inspector Witty and Sergeant Berube, decided to cooperate. He "turned state's evidence" and agreed to become an unpaid RCMP "SECRET AGENT".
- Maille did such a good job that he became "one of the boys" at the RCMP.
- Maille gave the RCMP a lead on Brian Mulroney's 1983 debt to the Talisman Motor Inn. $125,000 had remained unpaid until the lease at Place Vincent Massey had been renegotiated before its time, on orders from the PMO.
Andre Perrier ADM at DPW had recommended the activation of the "purchase Option" instead, but the mandarin was over-ruled by the PMO.
- Maille heard J-P Tessier, owner of Place Vincent Massey, say that he had given Pierre Bourques, the owner of Place Louis St. Laurent, a helping hand with B. Roy at the PMO, "to help him get a lease". Mr. Tessier died suddenly, of a "burst appendix", during the Quebec hospital strike.
- Maille testified about a "GAP" in the RCMP tape recordings.
- Maille described the corruption, as well as the sources of illegal income earned by the mayor of Hull (1992) Marcel Beaudry (NCC Chairman) and of former (1970's) Quebec Treasury Board President, Oswald Parent, including the Swiss bank accounts managed by Maurice Marois' (a Hull Quebec Bourassa-Mulroney fundraiser) daughter. Both Beaudry ad Parent, were targets of the Quebec Commision on Organized Crime (CECO) in the 1970's, but they escaped prosectuion when Judge Dionne was compromised by strippers, in his Hull, Quebec hotel room, on the night before they were to be named publicly. The "Independent Prosecutor" also had his legs broken in Montreal. Mr. ANdre Frechette, the owner of the LIDO strip-club was the LINK. The CECO crime commission was subsequently "called off".
Posted 22 January 2006 - 05:55 AM
I just watched former Prime Minister Joe Clark on CTV news preaching about
the public "right to know" and particularly the right to know about "Shawinigate" and details of current Prime Minister Chretien's
involvement. Shouldn't he clean up his own house first? Ca. 1990
Ottawa-Hull developer Glen Kealey went before JP Lynn Coulter to present
evidence that then-Prime Minister Mulroney (and still good friend of Joe
Clark) was involved in a kick-back scheme using his Cabinet as "bag men".
It was Public Works Minister Roc Lasalle who had asked Kealey for a 5%
kick-back on a Kealey development. And according to the information
disclosed by Kealey, former Cabinet Minister Suzanne Blais Grenais had
testified before JP Coulter, under oath, that the PMO was fully cognizant
of these kick backs; that Mulroney was orchestrating them and funneling
the money into bank accounts in Luxembourg. Given that Lasalle was
eventually turfed out of office for corruption, given the Airbus disclosures, don't you think that the citizens of Canada have a "right to know" EXACTLY what transpired before JP Coulter? All it takes is release of the official transcripts.
Posted 22 January 2006 - 05:56 AM
Politicians have had too much power over the police, especially when it comes down to the investigation of politicians. This is not just a problem in Metro Toronto. One only has look at what has happened in Ottawa since the Conservatives took over in 1984 to appreciate the dilemma in which police find themselves.
Take the case of Hull businessman Glen Kealey, for example, who is quoted above. You may recall that Kealey, a Tory riding association president, was in business as a contractor when he says he was asked to pay a bribe to a Tory cabinet minister before he would get a multi-million-dollar building contract.
Kealey refused to pay the money, lost the contract and went on a campaign to expose corruption on Parliament Hill. His complaints were long ignored by the media and the police.
Kealey began picketing outside the Commons, where he jokingly referred to himself as an "outdoor lobbyist." He was there Christmas Eve, 1989, when Prime Minister Brian Mulroney came out the door and wished him a Merry Christmas. Kealey's reply was typically to the point: "No, it will be a Merry Christmas when they close the cell door behind you."
Since then Kealey has mounted his own private prosecution of the Tories, because government wouldn't. Last year, he went before Ottawa Justice of the Peace Lynn Coulter and laid charges of corruption and conspiracy against 13 prominent Tories and the three highest ranking Mounties, including Commissioner Norman Inkster.
As Kealey rightly pointed out in his speech in Toronto to the Libertarian Party, the charges were properly laid by Coulter only after she heard there was sufficient evidence against each party to mount such an action.
That is the way our judicial system is supposed to operate.
Two months after Coulter laid the charges, Ontario's chief of criminal prosecutions withdrew the charges against 15 of the 16 accused and instead launched a special investigation by the OPP.
Kealey, whose two-hour speech riveted all who heard it, is despondent that the OPP investigation of the criminal activities on Parliament Hill is going nowhere.
He thinks the politicians will manipulate the OPP into silence, but maybe he is mistaken.
Posted 22 January 2006 - 05:58 AM
CANADA's REPUBLICAN GUARD~!
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Canada's own version of Iraq's Republican Guard, today vindicated former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney of corruption, following a thirteen year investigation.
The RCMP (Royal Canadian Mason Police) have always done a better job at entertaining kids, by running their horses around in circles and figure eights, than they ever have in successfully investigating corrupt politicians. This is why they are being promoted by Walt Disney.
They are Canada's version of Baghdad Bob, Iraq's former Minister of Communications, Mohammed al Sahaf.
Oh well, Regime Change is the only hope left for Canada~!
Tuesday, April 22, 2003
Posted 22 January 2006 - 06:01 AM
POLITICIANS LIE BECAUSE THAT'S THEIR JOB
Republicans lie to you about the things they learn in secret that you know nothing about.
Democrats also lie to you about things that are obvious to you because they believe that you are stupid enough to believe them.
SEE "PARLE.MENT", WHICH IS FRENCH FOR "SPEAK LIES".
In fact neither believes in or cares what you think.
They care only that you continue to pay taxes to Yale's Skull and Bones, the middle-Eastern suzerain TOLLGATING AYATOLLAH TAX COLLECTORS to which they are both beholden for their above average life styles.
FROM GLEN KEALEY'S ARCHIVES
"Who was GLEN KEALEY?"
Everyone I meet today still ask me about how it was that I managed to have the three top RCMP Commissioners charged with corruption by an Ottawa court in 1991, and what happened to them and to the four Senators, the four Cabinet ministers and former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney's Chief of Staff who were charged, simultaneously, with conspiracy to commit fraud upon the Canadian people. The following is a synopsis of how I came to be involved and the 15-year investigation I undertook that followed.
In 1959 I began a 14 year career with Gestetner Canada, a British firm that manufactured and sold duplicating/ copying equipment worldwide. After spending time on service and customer relations in Toronto, I was promoted to sales and then sales management, in Montreal and Ottawa.
I left Gestetner in 1973 to open a company of my own called Safari Office Products and operated it for a year and a half. Lacking challenge doing this I had stints managing the sale of printing and typesetting equipment and then ran a couple of copy centre operations of which I was part owner. It was in one of these businesses that I conceived the Micot project, a $160 million "Intelligent Building Complex". This was in 1981, long before the advent of the Internet. I put together a fund-raising program that raised the interest of bridge financing partners. Together we then raised a firm commitment for the $160 million construction cost (from blue chip pension funds) of MICOT, the Hotel/Office/ Showroom/Convention/Retail/
Education "city-within-a-city" to be constructed on a 200,000 sq. ft. site directly across the Ottawa river from Parliament Hill. It would enclose 1.5 million square feet of "intelligent space" (pre-wired on a ten foot grid for computers and communications) and the two towers would rise to 24 stories.
After acquiring the land from a school board and building a replacement school worth $3.6 million, the MICOT project (Manager's Institute of Communicating Office Technologies) was ready to proceed. In 1986, letters of Intent suggested that the project would be fully rented prior to opening day (3 years for construction) and that my remaining shares would then be worth $23 million; with further projected personal income amounting to more than $1 million annually. This is when I was approached by the Mulroney Tory government (by Roch LaSalle, the then Minister of Public Works) who requested that I pay the Tories 5% of the cost of the project ($8 million), plus a $5,000 messenger fee for himself personally. I refused outright, and subsequently the Tories, due to their secret insider Masonic contacts, took actions that then prevented the confirmed financing from going ahead.
That is when I realised that I, in fact, must have lied to my children, as had my own care-givers lied to me, when I had led them to believe that in Canada we lived in "a democratic country ruled by law". I then understood that, to the contrary, we live in "a fascist country ruled by criminals" and I vowed that sometime before I died, I needed to get to the bottom of this newly arrived at understanding.
To make a long story shorter let me just state that the Minister of Public Works's secretary had contacted me at my office and asked me to meet with LaSalle, at Nate's Restaurant, in Ottawa, for breakfast. Once there, LaSalle stated "the time has come for the Government to help your project ...and that will take some money." After a brief sales pitch made to me by LaSalle, on how lucky I was to be dealing directly with him as opposed to dealing through a third party, and with emphasis being placed on the fact that help would come my way as soon as I paid his up-front courier fee of $5000 cash (known in sales as "closing on a minor point"), he sat back and waited for my response.
When I said "no way", that I would never pay a bribe and then also reminded him that our project was not a government project; that it was private sector in its function, and also, that immediately it would create 5,000 jobs for which he could take credit, LaSalle laughed and restated "when you're ready for your project to go ahead, call my secretary and bring the money to our next meeting". (Later, I offered, took, and passed, a 3.5-hour polygraph test administered to me by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, based on the events that had transpired at this meeting).
I then proceeded to my office where, by phone to Montreal, I informed my two partners, the financier and the architect. Both suggested that I might have been a little rash in turning him down (my own business experience was in technology and printing; theirs was in the construction industry of which I knew nothing). No matter, I was the President of the project and, as a result of our Unanimous Shareholders Agreement, my partners could not act against my wishes without breaching our contract.
Later, they tried to steal control of the project away from me, but lost in the courts; the resulting publicity causing the project to die before its construction. However, they did make a large profit on the sale of the land to Bell Canada.
When this bribe request first occurred I had put it down to the actions of a lone crook who happened to be in political office. After completing my investigation of all the facts surrounding the request for a bribe (5 years), I presented all of the evidence confirming the existence of a vast criminal conspiracy which I had compiled to a criminal court in Ottawa. The court agreed with me that the problem was systemic. Immediately warrants were issued for 16 people, including: a) the top 3 Commissioners of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (ceasing and limiting police investigations of a political nature);
the Prime Minister's Chief of Staff; c) 4 Top Senators; d) 4 Cabinet Ministers (called Secretaries in the USA) and other backroom flunkies, (all for Fraud upon the Government).
However, once backroom Masons in the Just-us Department got involved, only 1 Senator was eventually sent to trial (Senator Cogger was eventually found guilty), while the rest scattered like the rats they were, on former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney's sinking political battleship. Most of the corrupt cops then went to work as auditors, either for banks or accounting firms (a la Arthur Andersen).
My first suspicion that Freemasonry was somehow involved came to me as a result of an interview I did with the National Editor of the Toronto Globe and Mail, Paul Polango, in my home-office, in 1991. His interest in the role that Freemasonry had played, or not played, in my investigation which led to charges of "ceasing and limiting police investigations" being laid by the court in Ottawa against the top three Commissioners of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police had sparked my interest in Masons.
Later, following my first sleep-over at the home of the then Globe reporter Stevie (Stephanie) Cameron, done at her invitation in order to fill her in on my knowledge of corruption during the Mulroney years, I was intrigued by the role that her husband had played in writing the unconstitutional Meech Lake Accord, on behalf of the same politicians that Stevie was, purportedly, investigating. As well, Stevie's holidays in a villa in the south of France also piqued my curiosity.
Finally, the contacts that I had made during my years in business and subsequent to my faxing campaign to the then 91 Embassies in Ottawa during the Gustafson Lake native/Privy Council/ Rockefeller/media standoff in British Columbia, helped me to further understand the "missing links" in my ongoing research into The Grand Canal massive water diversion project, and former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney's employment by the world's first food cartel led by Archer Daniels Midland (ADM). ADM is the original spelling of the name Adam. It is Freemasonry's code word, along with "dyke", meaning "containing the flow and diverting" from the original.
As a result of all of the evidence discerned from the above, Freemasonry became my prime suspect. Furthermore, my personal contacts with MLA Gilles Rocheleau, the former mayor of Hull, Quebec, who later became the Minister for Public Security for the Province of Quebec, helped me to understand the links that existed between English Freemasonry and the French Jacobins. When alive, Rocheleau's restaurant in Hull (across the river from Ottawa) was called Le Bocage, which phonetically converts to Jacob when read backwards. This name conforms to the rules, or principles, of coding and decoding used by Zoroastrian Freemasonry.
The rest was all reader-analyst type "police work" on my part.
As a result of my 15 year investigation I have no problem believing that all politicians and all political parties are in fact "Cosmetic Leaders" who take the "public heat" created by the corrupt system's premier "Character Assassins" and opinion makers called the Media. Politicians don't now, nor have they ever run the country themselves. In Canada, they simply follow the instructions of Freemasonry which are sent to them through the Privy Council. Priests of Zoroastrian Freemasonry, with the assistance of their "character assassins" called the Media, benefit most in the short run from this systemic corrupt conspiracy.
Glen EP Kealey, National President,
Canadian Institute for Political Integrity