By a Canadian Patriot Investigative Team
(Based on original research done by Raynald Rouleau in 2002 in l’Acropolis)
Every revolutionary scientific discovery must necessarily throw into question our entire system of axioms which compose our scientific baggage. For example, had Kepler accepted the theory that pre-supposed the earth to be at the center of the Solar System 500 years ago, he could never have calculated the relative distance between the planets, nor their elliptical orbits or harmonic arrangement around the Sun. Likewise, had Eratosthenes supposed the earth to be flat 2500 years ago, he never could have calculated its circumference.
Similarly, in order to ensure Canada’s and Quebec’s full participation in the emerging new pro-development system, it will be necessary to address and challenge the axioms underlying some of our population’s deeply held beliefs about national history and culture.
The Origins of the Parti Québécois:
The founders of the Parti Québecois (PQ) never had the intention of transforming Quebec into a truly sovereign country: that is to say, a constitutional republic, independent of the British Empire. A republic that would be built upon the inalienable rights of citizens, as these were defined and later enshrined in the preamble of the United States Constitution by the founding fathers of the American republic, as the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
We are not referencing the actual leaders of the PQ, but rather those who, from the beginning, catalyzed the PQ into existence and continue, to this day, to forge and profit from the artificial divisions that were partly successful in setting up the larger segment of the population of Quebec, the French speakers against the English speaking Canadians living in Quebec and the rest of Canada. A perceived unbridgeable divide that was famously called The Two Solitudes, in earlier times.
In fact, these catalysers of the separatist movement had fought tooth and nail against Daniel Johnson Sr. who was among the leading nation-builders in Canadian history and one who did have a mission to implement a constitutional republic for Canada modeled on the American constitution.
The PQ was created 16 days after the tragic death of Daniel Johnson, the then Premier of Quebec. The goal was simple: attract all separatist-nationalist forces; whether they be left, right, communist, socialist, catholic or Masonic. The game plan was straightforward: maintain the separatist movement as a wedge issue, a divide and conquer British Empire tactic and prevent a Johnson solution that would overthrow the British stranglehold over Canada.
In 1982, the LaRouche authored Draft Proposal for a Commonwealth of Canada was also an attempt to free all Canadians from British imperial control. Now, in 2013, the required policy is called the Glass-Steagall system that would eliminate speculative banking and create a Canadian National Bank, on Hamilton’s model, that would issue large amounts of productive public credit that would transform Canada into a fully sovereign nation-state.
The Queen’s Crown Agents
One of the impediments to a sovereign Canada has been an aspect of the Monarchy’s extension into its colonies and beyond which is of exceptional importance for Canadians and Quebecois to become familiar with: Her Majesty’s Crown Agents.
Before Canada was ever given the legal status of “country”, the term in usage was “Dominion of Canada”; an appendage of the British Empire within the North American continent, administered by Crown Agents, across hundreds of institutions.
This structure still exists to this day, and in certain ways, exercises an even greater influence today. “Crown Agents have no formal Constitution and are not part of the United Kingdom Civil Service or of the United Kingdom Government machine… Crown agents act as businesses and financial agents for the Governments of all territories for the administration of which the Secretary of State is ultimately responsible, including the territories under the protection of Her Majesty and the territories administered on behalf of the United Nations”1.
Crown Agents work directly through such key organizations that run the upper echelons of the Civil Service, as well as the Canadian Institute for International Affairs. These bodies coordinate directly with the Canadian oligarchy and London’s Foreign Office through the Canadian Council of Chief Executives. It is not within the corporate boards of directors or even parliament, but here in this hive, where the real directing power of Canada is located.
As for the Parti Québécois itself, it was founded by René Lévesque. During World War II, Lévesque was recruited by an agent going by the name of Robb, who was the Montreal bureau chief of the Office of War Information2 (OWI), a nominally American intelligence service, but which operated under British control3. Lévesque was sent to New York to meet Pierre Lazareff, the editor-in-chief of the French services of the OWI. He was quickly sent to London. By the end of the war he had attained the equivalent to the level of captain: “We were still among the best paid guys. I had something equivalent to the grade of lieutenant. I think I ended as a captain. I wasn’t a captain in charge of a unit, but something equivalent” said René Lévesque in an interview years later4. After this experience, he was recruited by British intelligence as a “journalist” for the Montreal office of the international radio service of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). He was transferred to television services in the 1950s and became a celebrity for the French Canadians with his popular political-economic news program “Point de Mire” on Radio Canada.
During the 1950s and early 1960s, Lévesque was a regular contributor to the magazine Cité Libre begun by Pierre Elliot Trudeau. By this time, Trudeau had also been recruited by British Intelligence after his conditioning at Harvard, and the London School of Economics. Trudeau was tutored by mentors like William Yandell Elliot, Joseph Schumpeter, Wassily Leontieff, and the leader of the British Fabian Society Harold Laski.
It was at this moment that Lévesque was «officially» catapulted to action in Quebec politics. The reason was very simple. It was vital to end, at all cost, the power of the Union Nationale as Daniel Johnson was in the midst of becoming its leader, after the sudden deaths of Maurice Duplessis and Paul Sauvé and the failure of Antonio Barrette as leader of the party. With Daniel Johnson as leader, the Union Nationale would again win the elections of 1966. From the British point of view, this could absolutely not be allowed to happen. Daniel Johnson was after all, a politician of Irish descent, who understood history, and most importantly understood the psychology of the British Empire, especially how the Empire had caused the Irish to suffer famine over generations as a matter of policy. Johnson was part of a small but influential group working within the Catholic Church, who opposed the massive introduction of Malthusian values into society via the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) which had forced school reforms leading to the brainwashing of youth in all industrialized countries. This was the beginning of what was later called “the counter culture revolution” of sex, drugs and Rock & Roll5.
After the Liberal victory in Quebec’s 1960 elections, René Lévesque, and another Brébeuf classmate Paul Guérin-Lajoie were among the new `reformers` assigned to carry out the overhaul of the Quebec political and educational structure. Oxford Rhodes Scholar Paul Guérin-Lajoie, the first Minister of Education, would lead the radical reforms of the Quebec educational system that brought in those OECD reforms by 1965.
Within this small but influential group working within the Catholic Church, this “alliance for progress and development” were to be found men representing several nations, from diverse regions of the world, such as Aldo Moro of Italy, Ben Barka of Morrocco, John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert, General de Gaulle of France, Cardinal Montini (later to become Pope Paul VI), and Martin Luther King, to name but a few. All promoted human progress. For these people, every human was created in the image of God, regardless of colour and every man, woman and child had the fundamental right to development and enjoy the full fruits of scientific and technological progress. This concept is extremely dangerous for an empire which can only maintain its hegemony through the exploitation of resources, and a physical-intellectual impoverishment of its subjects.
It is within this context that René Lévesque played his assigned role, directly against the networks of Daniel Johnson. The only positive steps taken by the Liberal Party in Quebec during their period in government (1960-1966), were made via the efforts of Charles de Gaulle, his ministers, and the leader of Opposition Daniel Johnson who had many like minded thinkers within the Liberal Party. The intensity of their organizing even influenced at times the paradoxical and confused Premier Jean Lesage who tended to see himself as a “C.D. Howe nation-builder”, yet was often controlled by forces that he never understood. Little beknownst to Lesage, these forces ironically hated both progress and especially C.D. Howe, the “minister of everything” of the federal Liberal Party of 1938-1957. Lesage would have the wits about him to first open up “Maisons du Québed” in Paris with the help of Charles de Gaulle, but not nearly enough to recognize in what way he was being used to undermine both Quebec and Canada as a whole.
The majority of the financing of the Liberal Party at that time, was coming from the networks run by Maurice Strong, an enemy of Charles de Gaulle, who himself was an active agent working for the networks of Prince Philip and Prince Bernhard. Liberal Party funds were channeled through subsidiary entities controlled by Power Corporation, of which Maurice Strong was a leading director. Strong became Vice President of Power Corporation in 1963, after having made a fortune during the nationalization of electricity in Quebec. Power Corporation soon got out of the business of energy and quickly became a giant consortium specializing in financial services whose reins were given to a young Paul Desmarais to run as an integral component to the newly re-organized Canadian oligarchy in 1968.
To get a simple idea of the relationship between René Lévesque and Daniel Johnson: One day, during a session of the National Assembly, Levesque told Johnson «vous êtes le personnage le plus vomissant que je connaisse» (“you are the most disgusting person that I know).
Nevertheless, after Louis Joseph Papineau, Daniel Johnson is the political figure who did the most to advance the development of Quebec and its citizens. Johnson understood that in order for the idea of a new constitution to be accepted in Canada, it needed the approval of the other provinces, though not necessarily Ottawa. In effect, due to a fallacy imbedded in the British North America Act of 1867, the progress of Canada has tended to be catalyzed by the provinces rather than the federal government. From a legal standpoint, Ottawa was rarely much more than the “buffer” between the British Empire and the Canadians. When Ottawa had been able to direct true development as was seen clearly during the 1937-1957 Liberal Party leadership, it was due to a mix of American private and public initiative, and the vast war powers used by the likes of C.D. Howe which permitted him to bypass both the parliamentary red tape and the civil service bureaucracy long after World War II had come to an end. Daniel Johnson knew that if he could gain the support of the provinces, then Ottawa would have no other choice but to accept the will of the people.
An informal conference comprising the ten provinces had occurred by the end of 1967, in order to put in place a strategy which would go on to become the first official Constitutional conference in February 1968, which strove to adopt a Canadian Constitution, written by and for Canadians. A constitutional committee made up of provincial representatives was established in the course of that month. This committee’s mandate involved studying all of the propositions made by the provinces. Sadly, on June 5, 1968, Johnson would suffer a severe heart attack, forcing him to pull out of politics for 10 weeks, returning triumphantly in September. He would give a press conference on September 25 inQuebec, just before leaving for the inauguration of the Manicouagan 5 dam, where he was planning to unveil his full nation-building vision. He was planning to meet de Gaulle ten days later, and was intending to invite him to return to Quebec in 1969. However, the next morning he would be found dead in his bed at the foot of the great hydro project that he had set into motion ten years earlier.
To add insult to injury, Charles de Gaulle would be denied an invitation to attend the funeral of “mon ami Johnson”. This would mark the end of Johnson’s Constitutional project.
The Charles de Gaulle – Johnson Project
During the summer of 1967, Canada was celebrating its centennial with the 100th anniversary of the British North America Act. It must be noted that the Canadian Confederation of 1867 was formed for no other reason but the protection of the empire against the republican forces of Abraham Lincoln in the United States and their allies in Canada. That same year, the president of France would take the hand extended to him by Daniel Johnson, which would send a shockwave throughout the entire North American continent. De Gaulle received an official invitation from the Premier of Quebec in May 1967, after Mr. Johnson himself was the General’s guest of honour in Paris.
During this historic meeting, France and Quebec had put an emphasis upon nine principled points of cooperation for the development of culture, technology, and industry. One of these points would involve Quebec’s entry into the Franco-German space program “Symphony”, for the development of communications satellites6. We must remember that thanks to de Gaulle, France had become a world power centering on the pillars of “Progress, Independence and Peace”. De Gaulle would tell the people of Quebec: “Your history is our history. In reality this is the history of France”, he would add that within the circumstances “it is now up to you to play the role which was written for you, a French role”. This would not mean that those who spoke English or were foreign to France couldn’t play a “French role”. Are you inspired by the idea of “Progress, Independence and Peace”? If so, then in the mind of de Gaulle, you are French!
Continuing his voyage in Canada, de Gaulle would speak in the Town of Berthier on July 24 1967: “France for her part, after great obstacles and tests, is in the midst of a booming renewal and, you can see and feel it. It is an example both of progress for the world, but also an example of the service of men, wherever or whomever they are!” Are these the words of an egotist, an ignoramus, a racist or a chauvinist as popular historians of the Empire would like you to believe?
Midway between Québec and Montreal, at the industrial city of Trois-Rivières, the General had launched a brilliant attack against the British Empire: “When a nation is born, we cannot justify her existence and her rights, as you sung “Oh Canada” earlier, we cannot justify her existence and her rights unless we are moving towards progress. This is who you are, and I can see it from one end of Quebec to the other. You are in the midst of accomplishing magnificent economic and technological developments!”
If we look at the world today, those countries most under-developed are those territories which are under the influence of the British Empire. The “love of progress”, as de Gaulle describes it, is non existent within the British Empire. Enslavement and the pillaging of resources are the only conditions within which the cancerous Empire can survive. But as Johnson and de Gaulle understood the problem clearly, cancerous cells have no lasting future. They die with the host which they had just killed. The greater their power, the faster their fall. A country cannot survive for long unless it is perpetually creating true wealth, unless it is progressing.
De Gaulle saw his intervention in Canada from 1960 to 1969 as not only an intervention into international geopolitics, but of primary importance for all humankind. Continuing his voyage along the shores of the St Lawrence River, he declared during a stop in Louiseville: “this effort (the cooperation between France and New France for progress, independence and peace), this effort is something which France wishes to develop and you can count on her, since that which we do together, we French from one side of the Atlantic to the other, is what we can do to improve humanity as a whole”.
“Vive le Québec Libre!”
On July 24, de Gaulle’s open top presidential motorcade made several stops in small towns and villages on his journey between Quebec and Montreal on what is known as the former “Chemin du Roy” (the King’s Path) along the northern shore of St Lawrence. Throughout the day, he gave several short speeches, in different town and villages, to cheering crowds. Before he reached Montreal in the early evening, he already had been enthusiastically greeted by nearly half a million people. In the evening, he delivered his famous speech from the balcony of MontrealCity Hall, in front of a large crowd assembled at Place Jacques Cartier.
“… I will confide in you a secret you should not repeat. Both this evening, and all along my journey, I have found myself in the same sort of atmosphere as I experienced during the Liberation. On top of this, I have seen what efforts have been achieved towards progress, development and consequently freedom that you have accomplished here… This is why she (France) has, alongside the government of Quebec, and alongside my friend Johnson, signed treaties to unite the French from both sides of the Atlantic… You are in the midst of becoming elites, you are creating factories, enterprises, laboratories which will surprise everyone… Long live Montreal! Long live Quebec! Long live a free Quebec! Long live a French Canada and long live France »!
The British monarchy was frightened by the visit of de Gaulle. The awakening of the “little people”, the awakening of a country, of a republic, the idea of freedom, and the integration of “that spark of France”, which is diametrically opposed to the Empire, represented a mortal threat to its existence. This is why a propaganda campaign would be unleashed exclaiming: “de Gaulle is playing the game of a small minority of extremists who want the separation of Quebec.” (72% of French Canadians were favourable of the policies of de Gaulle: Four million… that makes a nice “small minority of extremists”.)
As an interesting anecdote, Daniel Johnson succeeded, through the help of Pierre Laporte, in passing a surprising resolution in the Chamber: “I would like to make a proposition, although it requires the unanimous consent of the Chamber, to thank General de Gaulle, for having come to Quebec on our invitation, and chastise the federal government that has ensured he not be able to finish his trip in Canada…”7
It is quite interesting to note that René Lévesque, the Parti Québécois’s future leader, one of the leaders of the real minority of separatists, was not at all happy with de Gaulle’s move:
“We tried, until the last moment, to convince Aquin [one of Lévesque’s colleague] not to go ahead with his statement [in favour of de Gaulle]. (…) It didn’t take long before he was dubbed a Gaullist MNA. That’s exactly what we wanted to avoid when forming the movement. (…) You will find it was one of the major reasons we delayed the creation of the movement.”
Showing a total lack of understanding towards de Gaulle’s design, Lévesque continues: “We maintain an enormous gratitude to de Gaulle, for having, by this happy mistake, made us known to the world.” Lévesque says “mistake”, what a lack of insight! As if the British Empire’s attack on de Gaulle was based on the “Vive le Québec Libre”… De Gaulle had put sticks in the Empire’s gears the whole time he was President of the FrenchRepublic. That is why they hated him so much, not for few words said on the balcony of Montreal’s City Hall.
Freedom for the Whole of Canada
De Gaulle was never a separatist. On the contrary, it could be said that he was more favourable to a Canadian marriage than a Quebec-British relationship. The official declaration of the French Ministers Council of July 31 1967 was clear: “He (de Gaulle) was brought to measure their will (of the French Canadians) to attain the evolution that would need to be accomplished by Canada as a whole to control their own affairs and become masters of their own progress.”
Contrary to popular opinion, de Gaulle’s intentions were never to destroy Canada, but rather to liberate it from the British octopus, so that all of Canada could enjoy the liberty that would be the effect of France’s policy of Progress, Independence and Peace. While de Gaulle and Johnson clearly wanted to liberate Quebec, they knew that it wouldn’t be possible as long as Canada were an appendage of the Crown… During his press conference of November 27, 1967 at the Palais de l’Elysée, de Gaulle explained what two “preconditions” were absolutely necessary for a “free Quebec” to come into being.
The first would be a «complete change of the Canadian political structure” that had been established a century earlier by the British Monarchy. The second condition would necessitate the re-uniting of lost bonds between the French cultures on both sides of the Atlantic in solidarity. Alas, today we know that a series of (well synchronized) heart attacks insured that the historic reunion that de Gaulle dreamed of would not occur. This failure contributed directly to the formation of the terrible Anglo-American geopolitical system that we know today.
Diefenbaker, de Gaulle and Johnson
Throughout the 1960s, Daniel Johnson fought to ensure that not only Quebec, but Canada as a whole would eventually become sovereign and adopt a republican constitution. He understood, as General de Gaulle did also, that the proper development of a French society within Canada could only occur if Canada itself became a sovereign nation based upon a principle of progress. This is the only way to comprehend Johnson`s battle cry “independence if necessary, but not necessarily independence”.
This understanding was evidenced in Johnson’s energetic support to ensure the sweeping victory of John Diefenbaker as Prime Minister in 1957 and 1958 winning the full support of the Union Nationale. Diefenbaker is distinguished as the only Canadian Prime Minister to campaign vigorously for a full Canadian development plan and devotion to scientific and technological progress, going so far as to fight for the establishment of a Canadian Credit System for the first (and only) time in history8. To the astonishment of all, Diefenbaker’s Conservatives swept the elections taking even the majority of the vote in Quebec, a province which had never broken with its support of the federal Liberal Party since the days of Wilfrid Laurier. Since their original meeting in a Commonwealth Conference of Parliamentarians in 1950, Diefenbaker and Johnson would be allies with Johnson even being considered “the right arm of Diefenbaker in Quebec”. 9
Diefenbaker was also known to be allied closely with General de Gaulle during this period. This friendship quickly formed after their first 1958 meeting in Paris. Years later, Diefenbaker would write of his friendship with de Gaulle in the following terms: “I was very much impressed with de Gaulle’s wisdom and with the fullness of his dedication to the service of France. In truth, he was the soul of France… Of all the official visits that I made during my period of office, none exceeded in splendour General de Gaulle’s reception in honour of Canada.”10
The admiration both leaders shared for one another established a foundation of cooperation based upon a common recognition that the sovereignty of nations rested upon their commitment to constant rejuvenation. Were the policies of Diefenbaker and his “Northern Vision” to succeed, a systemic overhaul of the Canadian federal political structure must necessarily have occurred. A universal cultural heritage of progress would have established a principle upon which a multi linguistic unified country of various ethnicities could organically be nourished and grow. Without this orientation and a unified sense of national mission living in the hearts of a people, any nation were doomed to division, and multicultural stagnation under the Social Darwinist laws of “each against all”. Both de Gaulle and Johnson were undoubtedly sensitive to this fact, although Diefenbaker the unrepentant monarchist was somewhat more naïve regarding the obstacles that would be set in his path and eventually sabotage much of his attempted revolution in physical economics and statecraft.
During his Ottawa message of April 18 1960, Charles de Gaulle expressed his feeling of a Canada pregnant with the potential for progressive change, in the following terms:
“How delighted and honoured I am to find myself on Canadian soil. Many are the reasons for this: first of all, our deeply rooted past- numerous indeed are the links which bound us, and which, indeed, still bind us- and then there is the more recent past. I recall the two World Wars in which your country and mine joined forces in the battle for freedom of the world… I am therefore pleased to be back on your soil, and to renew my many friendships, and to greet you in the name of France. Long live Canada, Long live France, and Long live the free peoples!”
From a British to an American Constitution
While often critical of the direction America had chosen to pursue in the post-Kennedy era, de Gaulle and Johnson were not at all opposed to the United States as a country; that is to say, the essence and soul of the United States expressed in its constitution. This fact is evidenced by Daniel Johnson’s constitution project where on page 19 of his Égalité ou Indépendance, we can read: “It were wise to examine what opportunities exist to replace the British based parliamentary system with a congressional system based upon the American model”.
The problem is clear. The origin of those terrible things which we here in Canada have often attributed to the “American Empire” can usually be traced back to an oligarchy in the City of London, moving quietly through networks in the Canadian Establishment. De Gaulle, who had access to the most efficient intelligence services of the day, would certainly not ignore the evil role played by the secret societies and elite clubs loyal to the Empire. Those networks, which had come to determine in large part United States foreign policy, have had the tendency to induce the USA to behave very much contrary to its historical nature. On top of that, these networks are highly ingrained and protected throughout Canada.
By the beginning of the 1960s, the world was entering a very unstable period. The fruits of those great works planted by de Gaulle over the years following WW II, would reveal a new dimension to the French identity centered on “progress, independence and peace”, and come to play a crucial role in history. Under de Gaulle`s leadership, a new era was taking form: He would remove all French forces from NATO, he refused England’s desired entry into the Common Market since he knew that if they would be permitted entrance, then his Grand Design of a Europe as agreed upon by himself and Germany’s Chancellor Konrad Adenauer, from “the Atlantic to the Urals” could never come into existence. De Gaulle wanted a “détente”, and that would involve ending the cold war, and advancing policies of economic cooperation between the East and West. This period therefore elicited great hope among republican forces.
Daniel Johnson’s Courage
At the official dinner honouring General de Gaulle on the evening of his arrival in Québec, Daniel Johnson was full of hope and outlined his acceptance of the General’s challenge to join in his Great Design.
“Under your leadership, France has recovered a stability that merits our admiration. She has vigorously pursued a vast program of national planning which, in two decades, has justified your unshakable faith in what you yourself have called the ‘genius of rebirth.”
“[…] but your light shines beyond the frontiers of old Europe as witnessed by the eloquent receptions of which you were the object in Asia and in the Americas during recent years. Your understanding of world problems, your decisiveness and your tenacity executing your ideas polarises the hopes of numerous countries. Your diplomatic actions have proven in many ways to be one of the most powerful factors of international equilibrium.”
Two days later, just before de Gaulle’s departure, Johnson added that he believed a new era was opening up for Quebec on the world stage, and that Quebec would be able to play a role of partner and unifying force to achieve universal good will. In the mind of the Premier, the French nation in America would enter world history and realize her international role.
Upon returning to Paris, de Gaulle explained his political vision to the French people, a vision which Anglo American political forces acting through the French press and political channels rabidly attacked. In his televised address of August 10, 1967, the General demonstrated that the liberation of “New France” was a necessary aspect of French foreign policy.
“Ordinarily, each of us- and this is very normal- is absorbed by the circumstances and demands of daily life and thus takes very little time to look at the whole of which they are a part, or what could become of our country. And yet, everything depends upon it […]. As in the tense situation in which the world finds itself, our peoples’ actions weigh heavily on her destiny. We have the opportunity today to ask what goals are necessary for the direction of the country and which path will best achieve them?
[…] Progress, independence and peace, are those goals which our political decisions must follow […] In this way, all that is realized in the development of the country, in whatever domain, at whatever moment, in any way, is fought in principle and without exception, all of the time, by those humble followers of its truth. The fact that France, without denying any friendship to Anglo American nations, but breaking with absurd conformity and outdated habits, takes a proper French position on the subject of the war in Viet Nam and the conflict in the Middle East, or- no later than yesterday- of the unanimous and powerful will to franchise that French Canadians manifested around the President of the French Republic, stupefied and indignant as they were to the apostles of decline. “
For over four decades, a blinding darkness has spread across the Quebec political scene. After the death of Daniel Johnson, the nightmarish vision of those “apostles of decline” began to be felt across all of Canada. Over the recent decades, no one has yet risen to shine light on the road to progress, as the light of Johnson’s spirit was no longer directly visible. The English and French populations of Canada had fallen as moths at night, upon the blinding flame of the Empire, with Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau on one side, and his counterweight, René Lévesque on the other. Canadians thought they had to pick either one of the two, without ever considering for one instant that either choice would have them fall under a single trap.
Would it not have been better to return to a saner period of our history and to follow the example of those individuals who understood those goals of Progress, Development, Cooperation and Peace? Why must we continue to admire those who, consciously or not, brought the vision of de Gaulle and Johnson to ruin? Why must we continuously give our admiration to those who resisted joining their efforts when the time was ripe? Whether you were for or against René Lévesque is not important, but the great error of those living at that time, was their belief that René Lévesque truly desired independence and sovereignty, or even that Lévesque represented, under one form or another, the continuity of the “de Gaulle-Johnson” tradition.
Johnson’s presentation of his project for a constitutional republic to liberate all of Canada, and as de Gaulle hoped, transform the soul of the United States at the same time, was one of the most dangerous moments in the Empire’s recent history.
By the end of the 1960s, the choking of the «French effort» had become a terrible success, culminating with the death of Johnson, the fall of de Gaulle in France the following year, and the October crisis of 1970. The later October Crisis was an operation directed by the Special services of Anglo American interests, which terrorised hundreds of thousands of Quebecois under the dynamic of terrorism, cultural irrationalism and martial law, to the point that the traumatized population forgot what exactly de Gaulle and Johnson were trying to do for them. Little by little, the consolidation of perfidious independence movements, of which René Lévesque was a key figurehead, became hegemonic and a trap for those in whose hearts a flame of liberty had not yet been extinguished.
It is never easy to admit to have been scammed, especially when that scam, under various guises, spanned a period of over four decades. The majority of those members of the Parti Québécois or Bloc Québécois are not necessarily bad people, if perhaps a little naïve. In general most people who want sovereign change have a positive inclination and disgust for the effects of imperialism, but the fact of being emotionally attached to false institutions and false axioms that have led directly to civilization’s enslavement and downfall, will forever keep them from representing the true interests of our people.
1 p.1-2 A Short History of Crown Agents and Their Office, by Arthur William Abbott, C.M.G, C.B.E The Chiswick Press 1959. — A.W. Abbott à été Secrétaire de Crown Agents de 1954 à 1958.
2 p. 45 Renée Lévesque: Portrait d’un Québécois, par Jean Provencher Éd. La Presse 1973
3 In order to win the war, Roosevelt created the OWI and OSS (Office of Strategic Services). OWI took care of the propaganda while OSS took care of intelligence. After the war the OSS and OWI were dismantled, as they were not entirely under American control. The OSS became the CIA and the OWI was re-integrated into British Intelligence services.
4 p. 71 Renée Lévesque: Portrait d’un Québécois, par Jean Provencher Éd. La Presse 1973
5 At the end of the 1950s, 60% of Québec’s students were studying in science programs, and 50% of Canada’s hydroelectric power was generated in Québec. By the beginning of the 1960s, Hydro Québec forecasted that 50% of its energy would come from nuclear power by 1985. In 1963, under the direction of Alexander King (later to go on to co found the Club of Rome, in which Maurice Strong would be a key member), the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) had produced a report which served as a model for a “educational reform” within all industrialized countries. Some of these reforms would involve replacing constructive geometry for “new math”, and replacing the study of Greek and Latin with French existentialism. In Quebec, this reform coincided with the creation of the Ministry of Education (which involved a battle between the Catholic church and Freemasonry). See La Présse of November 11, 1963- A five part series defending the Grand Lodge of Quebec.
6 The Symphony Program was a Franco-German project consisting of two communications satellites which would have the effect of connecting Quebec with the rest of the French speaking world. De Gaulle invited Quebec to participate with Johnson replying “the cosmos will speak French”. The project wouldn’t be ready until the beginning of the 1970s. Sadly, the Ariane rockets had exploded on lift off twice and were finally sent in space by the American Delta rocket in 1974 and 1975. However the Americans only cooperated on the condition that there would be no intercontinental link, thus immediately excluding Quebec from the project.
7 p. 249 Daniel Johnson: 1964-1968 la difficile recherche de l’égalité. Pierre Godin, Edition de l’homme,
8 Matthew Ehret-Kump, Diefenbaker and the Sabotage of the Northern Vision, The Canadian Patriot, CRC, January 2013, p. 28
9 Albert Gervais, Daniel Johnson: A Short Biography, pg. 18
10 John Diefenbaker, Memoirs vol. 2, Macmillan of Canada, Toronto, p.94