SEPTEMBER - 2016
CANADA'S CORRUPTOCRACY - SEPT.01-2016
JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada)
BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' employescasecanada.ca (30 year unresolved 'standing case' legal matter in 'illicit' West Vancouver, B.C. teacher lay-off in 1985) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 12 different court systems and over 40 judges. No compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid. Recently two SCofC hearings were rejected (36883 QC & 36993 SK) with a pending hearing in P.E.I. and Alberta with renewed activity in Ontario as the Justice System gets ubered (external threat from an unexpected source) through the interlocking legal proceedings from different courts across Canada. Pulitzer Prize seeking writer is sought in this one-of-a-kind story of the century. This edition is focused on the topic of the death throes of a government and court committed to cover-up at the highest level of a government conspiracy. Even the MIA anti-employee media cannot now bail out the government and courts of Canada.
A) '...the righteous are struck down while the sticky-fingered escape' X Sue Grafton
B) '...that whenever a thing seems at its zenith, you may be sure its destruction has already started. Dictator Robert Harris
C) '...Usually a mild mannered profession, (Ontario) doctors now have whistle blowers, internecine warfare, manipulative social media ads, robocalls and finally a spine.' OMA deal is a house of cards Dr. Nadia Alam
D) 'If you can't find a lawyer who knows the law, find one who knows the judge.' The Halls of Justice L. Gruen.
E) 'Much of the blame for the Justice System hangover can be placed at the feet of an organization that is unaccountable, demonstrably incompetent and inarguably corrupt, the Canadian Justice System.' oops, my bad...the title actually read How the IOC lost the Olympic vision ....difficult to know these days with the authorities being what they are in all bureaucracies....
F) 'Do you trust to the system?' "Beats the shit out of anarchy." One For The Money Janet Evanovich
AUGUST 27-2016 So my old nemesis, controversial Ottawa Superior Court Judge, Colin McKinnon - the hanging judge - sentenced 3 'plotting' terrorists to long prison terms likening, as he pompously did, the Islamic State to the devil. (Earlier he sentenced a 'plotter' to 10 years). Whether or not these culprits deserved what they got is not the question here. Put simply, Mckinnon j. should NOT be sitting on the bench considering his egregious actions - for which he has never been held accountable - in 13-59060 (April-2014) with a second bastardized ruling used later before Justice Scott in October 14-61592. Those transgressions lie at the heart of two recent SCofC cases 36883 (QC) & 36993 (SK). If ON Attorney General Yasir Naqvi were doing his job, McKinnon j. would be under investigation. The media, knowing about this case, is trying to bury the name of McKinnon by merely referring to an 'Ottawa judge'. SEE Newsletter AUGUST 22-2016
1) For those readers who want the bottom line first; Canada's death rattle in this 30 year unresolved 'rinky-dink' labour matter where no compensation has been paid, is resounding throughout the land. A government-judicial conspiracy has been exposed in its entirety leaving Canada and its oversight bodies without credibility. That includes the anti-employee media and their boycott of this lead civil case in Canadian jurisprudence. Postmedia CEO Paul Godfrey should call off his silly boycott. It's also a blow to the independence of the RCMP.
2) A review of the recent SCofC rejections for QC and SK is in order in the above respect:
a) The QC action 36883 limited solely to disclosure (meeting notes of the West Vancouver School Trustees in June of 1985 when they laid-off senior teacher Roger Callow solely on the grounds for economic reasons) which has characterized all courts for 30 years has studiously been avoided. Without that disclosure, no case has any merit which is why the courts are heavily involved in this cover-up. Further, disclosure underlies habeas corpus the foundation of all law in a democracy. This QC action was a 'false flag' to the extent that I wished to establish the government conspiracy which was accompanied by gross egregious behaviour (which was unnecessary) by the QC courts. That problem now falls directly into the lap of P.M. Trudeau whom has a short window to take executive action. His first step in that regard, should be to dispose of his ineffective Justice Minister, Jody Wilson-Raybould.
b) The SK action is not a 'false flag' to the same degree as the conspiracy in QC. The same egregious court behaviour (again, unnecessary) has now fallen as well to Prime Minister Trudeau again as a result of a second Premier's failure of Brad Wall (after that of Premier Couillard in Quebec). While the same disclosure measure is included, there is the addition of a constitutional question as it relates to the ultra vires nature of BILL 35. The Employer did not rebut my assertion on this level (how could they when they do not recognize the jurisdiction of the courts in this matter. BILL 35 had its own conditions apart from statute law which is their claim. Keep in mind that if fraud is shown - as there most certainly is as attested to by disclosure material if I can get my hands on it - then all bets are off). Hence my assertion becomes fact in law explaining why I have asked for a 'directed verdict': e.g. everything which flowed from BILL 35 is therefore 'null and void' and I am due 30 years of back salary with interest - which exists apart from any judicial findings in any event . The same three judges - Cromwell (retired Sept. 01-16)/ Coté / Wagner sat on both cases amid my most vehement opposition as known to the Justice Minister and Prime Minister. Under those circumstances, P.M. Trudeau has no choice but to expel Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin (whom sat on the first enquiry in 1997). The other 4 SCofC justices are honour-bound to turn in their resignations and refuse to sit alongside Coté and Wagner.
The conspiracy explained
3) a) What I presume the initial conspiracy to be would show that two former West Vancouver Teacher Union presidents wished to protect their former colleague and incumbent principal from a charge of fraud I made to the Education Ministry in Victoria with detailed material. Jim Carter, Deputy Education Minister was the former principal of West Vancouver Secondary and had his own unsavoury experiences in 1978 when another senior teacher was expelled .(SEE web ORIGINS). The result was the imposed BILL 35 valid from July 01-1985 (I was laid off on June 28-1985, the only teacher ever laid off under this iniquitous BILL before it was withdrawn leaving me in limbo = banana republic justice.)
b) Between these two former Union Presidents, Superintendent Ed Carlin (former boss of Carter) and Carter; a scheme was hatched to shoot this 'whistleblower'. Their claim was that as I was the father of a young family, I could ill-afford to contest a firing which would be governed by BILL 35 terms and not those of the court or B.C. Labour Board. (The Employer still refuses today to recognize the court in that regard.) The School Trustees - whom never took the stand - bought into that scheme. The parent Union, the B.C.T.F. balked at that proposition as they had publicly declared BILL 35 to be the 'battle of all teachers' and hence financed an expensive 11 day arbitration (no press present) which was later thrown out by the court with the arbitrator being ruled patently unreasonable. I was left in limbo where I remain to this day.
c) When I changed lawyers and registered an Appeal to the Board's successful arbitration, the BCTF panicked realizing that I would have access to those meeting notes exposing them in the process so they paid for the court hearings as well. When the lawyer dropped out, those meeting notes which Justice Southin saw fit to return -'because she did not use them'- should have been returned to me rather than the Union. Currently, an action in P.E.I. is after the Union's copy of disclosure as I have a right to that documentation as a Union client.
d) The B.C. teachers at large have sat on their duff throughout this matter as opposed to giving their Union the boot and placing all school districts 'into dispute' until this matter is resolved. And it doesn't stop there. They are negatively impacted for their inaction as seen by a fine of $500,000 in 2005 for an 'illicit' walk-out. Not only are all teachers in Canada impacted by B.C. teacher inaction, but all professional teaching organizations in Canada; indeed, all employees for that matter e.g. ON imposed BILL 115 of 2013 which was also withdrawn in typical banana republic fashion.
4) The most significant constitutional question which underlies the basic relationship between Parliament and the courts currently being lodged in Alberta is this one to which the Employer and myself agree: What is the relationship between imposed government legislation and statute law where the imposed legislation makes no reference to supplanting any provisions of statute law. In brief, which legislation takes precedence?
5) The SCofC in 36993 SK could have slipped one over on the Employer by giving a 'directed verdict' which would obviate calling for the 'dreaded' disclosure if the court functioned on the level of the lower courts which it doesn't. Should the SCofC court approve a three person acceptance; a matter goes before a 5 person panel at which time the Employer could be expected to include the above constitutional question in addition to my own 'ultra vires' question...so much for Chief Justice McLachlin's glib public statement recently; 'I don't view courts as "legislating'', that's a label some people put on it, but I believe that what we are doing is our constitutional task of determining whether a challenged law is consistent with the Constitution.' Alberta is now the forum with a side-show against the Union in P.E.I.
cc SCofC 36993 / Wilson-Raybould /Trudeau
Ottawa Sun's Mark Bonokoski
SCofC Hon. A. Karakatsanis
CANADA'S CORRUPTOCRACY - SEPT.04-2016
JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada)
BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' employescasecanada.ca (30 year unresolved 'standing case' legal matter in 'illicit' West Vancouver, B.C. senior teacher lay-off in 1985) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 12 different court systems and over 40 judges. No compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid. Recently two SCofC hearings were rejected (36883 QC & 36993 SK) with a pending hearing in P.E.I. and Alberta with renewed activity in Ontario as the Justice System gets ubered (external threat from an unexpected source) through the interlocking legal proceedings from different courts across Canada. Pulitzer Prize seeking writer is sought in this one-of-a-kind story of the century. This edition is focused on the topic of the social consequences to democracy in Alberta courts now that the defeat of 'legal' Canada leaves us on a par with the U.S.S.R. as a 'land without hope'. SEE web SEPTEMBER 01-2016
A) Ottawa Sun columnist David Krayden '...When are the democratic roués and raconteurs going to realize that democracy is not entirely defined nor completely fashioned by perfectly equitable elections?...It is based in societal demand for liberty, a tradition of freedom, a free press, an unfettered opposition a police and military subject to the government and a judiciary responsible to the rule of law. my comment: And to think the authorities deliberately pissed it all away with the unresolved 30 year Employee's Case!
B) 'Nobody is wielding power in the (Roman) republic any more. That's the point. It's lying in dust waiting for whoever dares to pick it up.' Dictator Robert Harris
ALBERTA TEACHER SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR 'LAID-OFF' B.C. SENIOR TEACHER,
1) Quite an auspicious preliminary above to a plea for Alberta Teachers to stand up not only for Alberta Teachers but for all Canadians. E-mail your name and School District to me (see web for e-mail address) and I will put you in contact with each other to form a Newsletter with its intended purpose of demanding that the parties listed below publicly state their position on this all-important court case focusing on a constitutional question (agreed on by both the Employer and Employee) which underlies the relation between our courts and the governments: Can imposed government Bills displace statute law where the Bill does not explicitly state that intention? i.e. The West Vancouver School Board claimed that the provisions of BILL 35 passed in 1985 and only used against this target was exempt from judicial overview which, in 1986, quashed the arbitration favouring the Employer ruling, as it did, the arbitrator to be patently unreasonable. If my 30 year futile search for disclosure (basis of habeas corpus and therefore all law) which the many courts thwarted at great cost to the conduct of the Justice System, had shown fraud; there is no question as to the court's jurisdiction.
2)The forewarned Alberta parties to be lobbied are: a) The Notley gov't. and Edmonton Registry resistance to registering this case b) Conservative leader, Ric McIver c) Wildrose leader, Brian Jean d) Edmonton Journal & Calgary Herald. This is not so much an opportunity to act as the only opportunity for citizens to speak out.
3) In order to obtain Employer agreement to the constitutional question which they raised but were ignored in Ontario (13-59060 McKinnon j. see web), I am re-entering the same question without my demands for disclosure. Further, I am prepared to accept long-time B.C. Employer's counsel, Harris & Co. without reference to any of their 'inconsistencies' which have plagued this case as they are best positioned to develop their side of the question.
4) That the courts to date would side with the Employer reflects their cupidity as well as stupidity as it makes no sense for the Judiciary to 'put themselves out of business' as every government in future will impose all legislation if they can get away with this stunt.
5) DO: Form an ad hoc committee for the above purpose. If 'see a lawyer' is your advice, this kind of committee is not for you
DO NOT: Enlist Union leader support. If a teacher is to be laid-off, the Union position is that they do not want an expensive hearing hence their agreement with the Employer as to the target (as long as it is not a Union leader, of course). If B.C. rules apply, you may not represent yourself which makes it next to impossible to protect yourself against a 'sweetheart deal' (most dismissals are e.g. CBC Jian Ghomeshi case) Nor does the Union want anyone else on their 'turf'.
6) I do not ask others to fight my battles; I will do that myself if I can get an Alberta docket number. That is the scope of this committee.
TEACHERS IN OTHER PROVINCES ARE INVITED TO SHOW THEIR SUPPORT FOR AB TEACHERS
cc Justice Minister Raybould-Wilson (or her replacement) / P.M. Trudeau
CANADA'S CORRUPTOCRACY - SEPT.11-2016
JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada)
BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' employescasecanada.ca (30 year unresolved 'standing case' legal matter in 'illicit' West Vancouver, B.C. senior teacher lay-off in 1985) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 12 different court systems and over 40 judges. No compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid. Recently two SCofC hearings were rejected (36883 QC & 36993 SK) with a pending hearing in P.E.I. and Alberta with renewed activity in Ontario as the Justice System gets ubered (external threat from an unexpected source) through the interlocking legal proceedings from different courts across Canada. Pulitzer Prize seeking writer is sought in this one-of-a-kind story of the century. Now that the Justice System has trashed itself with the SCofC rejections, this edition is focused on the topic of
LEGAL ADVICE TO TEACHERS LAID OFF IN JUNE 2017 (Using the Ottawa Carleton School District as a model)
1) Possible laid-off target: 'So what legal advice can you possibly give to a laid-off teacher in 2017 considering that you consider the government and courts as a bunch of crooks under which you continue to lose after 30 years?' Response: Perhaps none, as the circumstances are very different. In 1985 when I was laid off by the West Vancouver School Board for economic reasons (read that 'whistle blowing'), there was no need; today there is a need for teacher lay-off due to declining enrolment where schools are reduced by as much as 50%.
2) If you are one of those laid-off next June, accept my condolences. Your colleagues are too busy thinking...'there but for the grace of God, go I'. Do not send factums or seek to contact me as you are on your own. The following are some guide lines to steer you in this downward path.
3) No employer has to keep any employee. In law, the question is one of appropriate compensation. Wrongful dismissal has a different set of laws from lay-off and is usually allotted about 2 years of salary depending on circumstances (usually no return of employment). Lay-off goes according to contract. You may not run both courses in tandem.
4) The signal most important recommendation is that you hire an employment lawyer paid by you in addition to any contested lay-off with the Union lawyer. That will enable you to obtain disclosure (the basis of habeas corpus and therefore all law). For 30 years, I have pursued obtaining disclosure from the Employer (currently, the focus in PEI with the Union) without success=court cover-up culminating in the above two SCofC cases. The point here is that if you can show fraud - as there most certainly was in my 1985 lay-off - all other laws are subordinated to that claim. CASE STUDY: On a sunny day in June of 1992, a senior wild-life biologist arrived at work in Ottawa to witness a security guarded table across the entry-way with a seated clerk holding a list... 'just like Auschwitz', he said. His name was crossed off and he was directed to the right room with others where he received his pink slip (the left room were confirmed in their jobs). His explanation to the union leader fell on deaf ears: namely, that as a senior, he held many of the jobs now being done by the juniors being retained. He later learned that a few dismissed clients got lawyers and were later quietly provided with an additional two years of salary.
5) The Ottawa Carleton School District is speaking school amalgamations for June 2017. They could just as easily have made these changes for this September saving a considerable amount of money except that would not include teacher lay-offs which is a central part of their scheme.
6) In February 2017, union leaders will be surreptitiously getting together with principals to provide for a list of lay-off victims although expect them to deny any such collusion. It is a most difficult position for a principal to be placed in although there will be a few no doubt who will enjoy 'the challenge' of 'making difficult decisions'. For example, you cannot relocate a physics teacher to teaching design and technology or vice versa. English teachers cannot be switched to French Immersion; the only growth area in education today.
7) Seniority goes on a District wide basis although in my arbitration, the corrupt arbitrator accepted individual staffing at West Vancouver Secondary School (In fact, even here, there was an increase in teacher hiring, any number of positions of which I was qualified to hold.) I mention the point here as I would expect the Wynne government to impose legislation similar to BILL 35 in B.C. in 1985 to 'accommodate' dismissals (much like an imposed Ontario BILL 115 in 2013)
8) Expect the judges to back the employer-union lay-off lists as a successful case, in labour law, forces a second case and so on and soon until the right lay-off victim is selected. That's too expensive for the system. At best, you may get an honest judge or arbitrator such as Senator Duffy or CBC's Jian Ghomeshi, but you're more likely to get the kind of arbitrator I got in 1985 (Louis Lindholm d. 1987) with the court system protecting his deceit for the past 30 years = no decision ergo no compensation (includes pension rights).
9) If you are permitted to contest your lay-off apart from the Union (union permission required), you should have a spare $100,000 for what is probably a losing situation.
10) As most contested dismissals average a couple of years, seek any employment in the interim to increase your cash flow. This legal delay is in large measure to discourage you.
11) Trust to your instincts...if something does not ring true, you are probably right.
12) For the Employer, they would like to break the back of seniority as one senior teacher can be replaced by two beginners for the same salary. That may happen somewhere in Canada in 2017. A senior teacher will never get employment again in Canada. You may find an overseas appointment if you wish to remain in the profession. Unlike the media where there were wholesale lay-offs recently, there is no 'think-tank' available to hire you dependent on your good relations with the media (which doesn't include suing them for dismissal ...and to think that there still is a journalism school!)
13) Your Union may encourage School Boards to permit early retirement for seniors without penalty as one means of alleviating the lay-off situation.
14) Don't try to emulate what I am doing in a 'one of a kind story' which will never be replicated. You may wish to support Alberta teachers (SEE CORRUPTOCRACY -SEPTEMBER 04-2016) in my bid to get this constitutional question which both the Employer and myself as the Employee agree on... : Can imposed government Bills displace statute law where the Bill does not explicitly state that intention? i.e. The West Vancouver School Board claimed that the provisions of BILL 35 passed in 1985 and only used against this target was exempt from judicial overview which, in 1986, quashed the arbitration favouring the Employer ruling, as it did, the arbitrator to be patently unreasonable. Regrettably, there was no mention of the obvious fraud.It may be a tiny step but the time to support such measures is NOW, not next June of 2017. Try writing letters to the Editor as a media boycott against me blocks anything I write.
15) Good-bye potential lay-off victims and good luck in whatever course you may take (but leave me out of it next June).
'The Outlawed Canadian in an outlaw Justice System and Government'
CANADA'S CORRUPTOCRACY - SEPT.18-2016
JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada)
BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' employescasecanada.ca (30 year unresolved 'standing case' legal matter in 'illicit' West Vancouver, B.C. senior teacher lay-off in 1985) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 12 different court systems and over 40 judges. No compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid. Recently two SCofC hearings were rejected (36883 QC & 36993 SK - pending) with a pending hearing in P.E.I.(against union) and Alberta with renewed activity in Ontario as the Justice System gets ubered (external threat from an unexpected source) through the interlocking legal proceedings from different courts across Canada. Pulitzer Prize seeking writer is sought in this one-of-a-kind story of the century. Now that the Justice System has trashed itself with the SCofC rejections, this edition is focused on the topic of the Alberta challenge and 'slick Ratchel'.
1) To jump to the bottom line: The Justice System of Canada has imploded under 36883 QC and 36993 SK wiping out, as it does, the credibility of the governments of Premiers Couillard and Wall in a matter of systematic judicial malfeasance. In the U.S. judges and lawyers go to jail for the stunts pulled in the Employee's Case (Canada). This whole mess has landed in the lap of P.M. Justin Trudeau whom is the first of the 21st century Prime Ministers forced to use their executive powers in a legal debacle without equal due to systematic judicial malfeasance.
2) So why the current legal case in Alberta focusing solely on a constitutional question? The short answer is because this question - of which both the Employer and this employee agree - is at the heart of the operation of Canada; namely, 'What is the relation between imposed government legislation e.g. B.C.'s BILL 35 and the courts of the land?'
3) In more specific terms of the Employee's Case; the Employer asserts that BILL 35 has its own conditions for lay-off and therefore is exempt from judicial overview (presumably, 'fraud' - the essence of my request for disclosure - is exempted.)
4) In 1986, B.C. Supreme Court Justice, Mary Southin, in quashing the arbitration favouring the West Vancouver School Board ruling, as she did, that the arbitrator had been patently unreasonable, fell short of calling the matter a fraud (which it most obviously was which she knew as she was privy to the disclosure material).
5) The School Board appealed her Decision (in re-ordering an arbitration) and lost but here's the point - nothing happened leading to my 30 lost years in the wilderness seeking justice. No compensation has been paid.
6) In Ontario in 2014, the Employer sought to raise this constitutional question noted above in filing 13-59060 McKinnon j. but was ignored on this point. As Respondent, I was in complete agreement to that question. It is this same question which I am raising as the Plaintiff in Alberta without any accompanying measures e.g. disclosure, settlement fees, fraud. Hence the court is not in jeopardy from either this employee or the employer. (All other courts have been referred to oversight bodies due to court and Employer 'irregularities'. These McKinnon 'document(s)' with its 'frivolous & vexatious' charge is at the heart of 36883 QC & 36993 SK and my calls for an investigation in Ontario. Former Attorney General Madeleine Meilleur was a disaster on this matter with the incumbent, Yasfir Naqvi, being even weaker in the dissolute Wynne government.
7) Getting honest judges has been my bane in this legal debacle as the Chief Justices have regularly appointed judges which - if I may use an euphemism here - graduated at the bottom of their legal class. Some of those Chief Justices - and it appears Alberta may be a case in point here - use (or abuse) the Registry to attain their ends. For a few years, I butted heads with SCofC Registrar, Roger Bilodeau, in registering SCofC challenges although he was strangely absent from 36883 & 36993. The Ontario Appeal Court of Chief Justice George Strathy are past masters at this sort of obfuscation.
8) Add to that mixture, an anti-employee media (SEE web RED NECK MEDIA (1986) and read about the 'gotcha' approach although the 2014 Ottawa Citizen (p.1 Apr. 28-2014 McKinnon judgment) which refused my 'right of reply') is more typical. The Regina Leader Post covered for the SK courts by failing to publish this legal debacle and perhaps harbingers the role of the Edmonton Journal and Calgary Herald. I have no way of knowing as to whether 'Letters to the Editor' are being omitted considering that Alberta Teachers have been widely canvassed on this issue. Expressed otherwise, will these two Alberta newspapers go the way of the SK newspaper witnessing, as it did, the demise of the Brad Wall government?
9) Alberta politicians other than Notley are receiving copies of this newsletter - Ric McIver/ Brian Jean / Jason Kenney. Kenney as a federal M.P. is well aware of how Parliament lost its credibility when the four Party leaders remained mute over this case in the last election (Oct. 19-2015). In brief, the role of the 'individual' was sacrificed to 'power politics'; a distinctive aberration for Canadian democracy. Currently the unemployment rate in Calgary is running at 9%. Will these politicians stand idly by and permit defenceless employees to be subjected to the type of legal calumny experienced by this writer over the past 30 years?
10) Of course, it goes without saying, that if the Employer is correct in their assertion that imposed legislation circumvents the courts, then all governments can be expected to impose legislation making the Justice System of Canada redundant. Perhaps that is already the current state if the Employee's Case is any example.
11) 'Slick Ratchel' can break the court impasse on this one if she wishes to. Leaving it for some other province to be pilloried on this account is not a NIMBY option. At this point, nothing will happen unless other forces in AB get active as evidenced by the non-action in Quebec & Saskatchewan.
cc Premier Notley / Politicians McIver / Jean / Kenney
- no point sending anything to Premiers Couillard & Wall whose provinces are in disgrace
Edmonton Journal / Calgary Herald
Justice Minister Wilson-Raybould / P.M. Trudeau / Premier Wynne
SEPTEMBER 23 -2016
CANADA'S PROPOSED EXTRADITION DEAL WITH CHINA
1) Why China wants it. The well-healed enemies from the old Regime capable of giving the current Chinese leadership are holed up in Hong Kong and in such countries as Canada. Hence the leadership wishes to expunge that power source.
2) The quid pro quo deal with Canada is that if you hand over these Chinese 'financial miscreants', we will reward you with economic deals. Hence Canada is getting involved heavily in Chinese politics. It reminds me of when Prime Minister Joe Clark acquiesced to the movement of the capital from one Israel City to another and then had to do some fast back tracking.
3) So Canada is in the position of finding a scapegoat which the courts will 'Maranger' for the purpose.
4) Justice Robert Maranger of the Ottawa Superior Court, as I can attest to from personal experience, is a very slippery justice indeed. While few are aware of the court machinations - although it is on my old website employeescasecanada.com - his tactics were publicized in the 'Diab Case'; the story of an Ottawa University professor accused of terrorism in France in 1980.
5) Canada has an extradition treaty with France (although that country plus the U.S. do not have reciprocal extradition treaties). Both Diab and myself lost our respective cases before Maranger as well as the 3-person Ottawa Divisional Court Appeal courts held, interestingly enough, on the same day. Diab was deported by the Tories. I appealed to the Ontario Appeal Court where my documents got 'lost' in the Registry.
6) Maranger stated that the information against Diab was so weak that it was unlikely that any court would find against him. A signature from 1980 in a French hotel strongly questioned by the Defense appeared to be sufficient for Maranger to claim 'that the law would not permit him otherwise than to deport Diab. (Always watch out for judges quoting 'the law' as a complete reading will include the antithesis of almost any law. For example, my substantiated claims of fraud against the various courts and Employer Legal Counsel are dismissed on the grounds that I am being frivolous & vexatious...well, it's the law, isn't it? It's also why the Canadian Justice System collapsed due to systematic judicial malfeasance over 12 separate courts and over 40 judges in an unresolved labour case where no compensation has been paid.)
7) As to Diab, he could very well be guilty. However the question in law is to find him guilty through due process of the law (a disappearing notion in our present day courts). So which interest is in favour of persecuting Diab for a 1980 terrorist plot in Paris against a Jewish target; the first such occurrence in which the French government displayed disinterest at the time? Even today, there is wide-spread persecution of Jewish interests in France by local Palestinians. The last thing that the French need is another terrorist trial; possibly on the level of a Dreyfus case.
8) Israel and its execution squad dating from World War II had extensive experience hunting down enemies to the state beginning with the Nazis. Even Diab believed the police following him were a Jewish kiton bent upon killing him. So why the court case?
9) At this point, I turn to speculation. What Israel wanted was control over our Justice System as it related to persecuting the Palestinians opposing them, possibly to having them eventually declared a terrorist organization.
10) Canada smelled this fish and undermined the ploy by sanctioning a deportation which Israel never expected leaving Diab to rot out over the past two years in a French prison.
11) To be sure the above model will again be tested with the Chinese. P.M. Trudeau may offset his position by saying that while China's Justice System may be controversial, that is not the case for Canada. The Employee's Case Canada shows how inaccurate is that assessment.
PLACARD: CANADIAN TROOPS / STAY OUT OF AFRICA
1) I sincerely hope that I am wrong on this one but many pundits are worried about Trudeau committing Canada's 'peacekeepers' to 'hot wars'...it is a recipe for disaster.
2) The scenario I predict is that Daesh will infiltrate African UN Forces to get close to the Canadians so that they can be wiped out in a single attack giving the terrorists a major propaganda victory.
3) Calling Parliament on the problem is problematical:
a) Perhaps M.P.'s might quietly wish that this never happens so that they can blame Trudeau after the fact if necessary. But what does that say about the value of having a Parliament?
b) As it would not be a free vote, the government could be accused of playing politics with their majority at the expense of needless military deaths.
c) Even if a majority rules one way or another; they will be held responsible for the outcome as either being defeatist on the one hand or, on the other hand, taking unnecessary risks.
4) My lone sign above in public may be the best answer. I have had others: e.g. 2008 / WE'RE LOSING THE FUCKING WAR raised eyebrows but it took 2 more years of military deaths in order to save face for 'I will not cut and run' P.M. Harper. Internationally, I believe that I was the only Canadian in 2006 with this protest placard: I SUPPORT FALUN GONG which led the fight against human body transplants. Even today, few Canadians outside of the Chinese Community feel outraged against this practice. I guess that is why we have wars.
CANADA'S CORRUPTOCRACY - SEPT.25-2016
JUDICIAL LIES PILED ON TOP OF JUDICIAL LIES = CASE LAW for the Employee's Case(Canada)
BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' employescasecanada.ca (30 year unresolved 'standing case' legal matter in 'illicit' West Vancouver, B.C. senior teacher lay-off in 1985) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 12 different court systems and over 40 judges. No compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid. Recently two SCofC hearings were rejected (36883 QC & 36993 SK - pending) with a pending hearing in P.E.I.(against union) and Alberta (with employer) with renewed activity in Ontario as the Justice System gets ubered (external threat from an unexpected source) through the interlocking legal proceedings from different courts across Canada. Pulitzer Prize seeking writer is sought in this one-of-a-kind story of the century. Now that the Justice System has trashed itself - or about to - with the SCofC rejections, this edition is focused on the fall-out from the Supreme Court of Canada
The Last Hurrah...how the Supreme Court of Canada committed to the conspiracy behind the Employee's Case in 2016
Archie-Riverside High School
1) Am I surprised at the 'logical conclusion' of the Justice System with the Supreme Court of Canada's rejection of hearings for 36883 QC and 36993 SK? (pending) Disappointed, yes, but this is the logical extension to a Justice System steeped in perfidy as evidenced by the past 30 years of legal activity in Canada with the unresolved Employee's Case.
2) Nothing has been resolved recently other than to highlight the failures of Premiers Couillard and Wall, whom were kept fully apprised of events in QC and SK, to witnessing their provinces dissolve into lawless entities with the Office of the Prime Minister being challenged to exert executive powers in that vacuum. Doing nothing is not an option. If not Trudeau, then his successor (only Tony Clement MP - 'gazebo Tony' - has the necessary brain-power of all the M.P.'s to handle this portfolio) but I speak prematurely as Trudeau has until the end of September to 'show his colours' by investigating the QC Court dismissal on June 09-2016.
3) The second major challenge is to the anti-employee media and their 30 year boycott of this major legal story which has decimated Canadian democracy. They will never recover their credibility. Indeed, Postmedia ordering their editors in the last election (Oct. 19-2016) to write editorials across English Canada in support of the losing Tories is proof positive of a bureaucracy with the power from the top down thus explaining the boycott on the Employee's Case.
4) Hence the two challenges above are explained by a Supreme Court of Canada forcing those two interests of the Prime Minister and media -through their silence- in becoming complicit in their conspiracy. That is what those two case rejections are really about.
5) Both cases called for disclosure (information alleging fraud) which is the basis of habeas corpus and therefore all law. Many discrepancies exist on this level in other legal cases in Canada. The significance here is that with the QC challenge solely on disclosure; the SCofC committed to this fraud. No doubt my professed claim that if the matter were heard and once I got my disclosure as a preliminary, I was not going to finance the examination of corrupt QC courts; that would lie to the P.M. (and still does even though I did not obtain disclosure).
6) The matter in SK is different as attested to by a filed addition (SEE web 36993 SK) which included a constitutional question vis a vis the ultra vires (beyond the law) nature of BILL 35 which strikes at the heart of the SCofC's function along with corrupt Appeal Court practices. Failure here to grant a hearing strikes at the very core of the corruption at the level of the SCofC.
7) In brief, the denial to hear these two cases has led to anarchy in Canada's Justice System.
8) Of far more significance is the constitutional question currently being raised in AB questioning the relation between imposed government legislation and court oversight. Both the Employer and myself agree on the nature of this question so there should be no need for judicial hi-jinks. For example, the West Vancouver School Board claimed that the provisions of BILL 35 passed in 1985 and only used against this target was exempt from judicial overview which, in 1986, quashed the arbitration favouring the Employer ruling, as it did, the arbitrator to be patently unreasonable. Regrettably, there was no mention of the obvious fraud which would have ensured the court's intervention (why disclosure is so important in this case).
9) The School Board lost their appeal on the above question in 1986 in B.C. Supreme Appeal Court but still refuses to acknowledge court (or labour board) oversight. The question is a key one for the massive teacher lay-off across Canada expected in June of 2017 due to declining enrolment. In brief, will laid-off teachers have access to such as the Bill of Rights? Not, to be sure, if governments impose legislation under the conditions above. Indeed, in future all legislation can be expected to be imposed thus making the courts irrelevant.
10) The courts are on the horn of a dilemma: how to protect over 40 judges whom have committed to the cover-up of a massive government conspiracy and still protect the existence of the court's operation to over-see government legislation (otherwise the judicial system becomes redundant as a consequence of venal imposed legislation) along with screwing me at the same time. Justice Southin in 1986 tried that and the Justice System, as we have seen, ultimately collapsed hence explaining the new action in Alberta. There is no bigger challenge to both government and courts than that which is the scope of this hearing in Alberta which the Edmonton Registry is currently resisting; namely, does imposed government legislation have the power to obliterate statute law?
cc P.M. Trudeau / SCofC Hon. M. Moldaver / RCMP