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.
QUOTES:
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
MESSAGE:
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
RCMP
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
QUOTES:
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,
ROGER
CALLOW
MESSAGE :
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'.
MESSAGE:
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
MESSAGE:
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.
ALBERTA
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