Stephen Harper guilty of treachery – aiding and abetting US blockade, invasion & armed occupation of CanadaCorruption, World news Sunday, July 21st, 2013
Canadians have a right to know that their Prime Minister has been secretly negotiating with the United States to harm, impair and dissolve the sovereignty of Canada. Acts that offend the Queen’s Duty, Honor, and Country. Section 46-1c of the Canadian Criminal Code establishes the Prime Minister’s action as a criminal offense – high treason. Under C46 of the Criminal Code, a person commits “high treason” who “c) assists an enemy at war with Canada, or any armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities, whether or not a state of war exists between Canada and the country whose forces they are.” Is the United States our enemy? Is the US waging war against Canada? The answer to both is – Yes!
The US government officially declared war with Canada and every free nation on Earth when George W Bush declared “War on Terror“, before a special joint-session of Congress, following the US government’s false flag attacks on September 11, 2001. On Sept. 20, 2001 Bush gave “marching orders” to the US military and rallied support for a World “War on Terror” which eventually lead to the wars of aggression and occupations in Afghanistan and Iraq and US mercenary wars in Libya and Syria. The US government declared that America would “pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation in every region now has a decision to make: Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists.” That is, for all intents and purposes, a declaration of a state of war against “Every nation in every region” including Canada.
Trade sanctions are acts of war – the blockade and seizure of goods by a belligerent. The US trade sanctions called NAFTA does exactly that. NAFTA blockades and seizes goods going into and coming out of Canada.
A blockade is an act of war by which a belligerent prevents access to or departure from a defined part of the enemy’s borders. A belligerent imposes trade sanctions just prior to invasion and occupation. Trade sanctions are instruments of warfare in that they are used to weaken the targeted country both politically and financially. Stephen Harper and Barack Obama officially declared war with a military blockade of Canada. In Washington, DC on Friday February 4, 2011 Harper removed Canada’s sovereignty. Harper secretively made a deal with the United States government and established a military blockade around Canada. The blockading state, the United States, made the blockade effective by declaring by notification that it will maintain armed forces all along Canada’s border in sufficient strength to prevent ingress or egress from Canada’s ports of entry.
This military blockade of Canada makes Stephen Harper a traitor. He is working secretively with a foreign government to dissolve the country we know as Canada. The secretive negotiations are being done without the involvement of our Parliament, or the people of Canada. It is an undemocratic betrayal of all of us. It is an illegal act of high treason.
Since Brian Mulroney there have been occasions in Canada where it has been appropriate to charge individuals with treason, but we have been reluctant and our national police force has been grossly negligent in their duties, to do so. Mulroney gave the sovereign power of Canada to the United States by passing the North American Free Trade Act. Mulroney knew what he had done amounted to treason and resigned on June 25, 1993, just two days after NAFTA was passed in Parliament by Mulroney’s Tory (Conservative) government. Mulroney betrayed Canada and its citizens when he handed control of trade and Canada’s natural resources over to a foreign state – the United States. Ever since the US has been freely and ruthlessly pillaging the labor, trade and natural resources of Canada.
Just 20 years later, another traitor, Stephen Harper is now willfully allowing for the United States government to infiltrate Canada’s security forces (both the Canadian police and Armed Forces). Harper is secretly engaging in traitorous acts against Canada and its people by “Harmonization, collaboration and information-sharing” with the United States Department of Homeland Security. In the war of 1812 Canadians and the First Nations people repulsed numerous American attempts to invade and annex Canada. Both Mulroney and Harper have allowed the United States (our known adversary and our enemy) to invade and annex Canada. Mulroney and Harper are traitors and deserve the severest punishment for their crimes.
Treason is a major crime no matter what country you live in. It is committed by individuals, motivated by ideological, religious, political or financial reasons. Those who commit treason have forsaken their loyalty to the sovereign power of the state of which they are citizens. They are prepared to betray their country and their fellow citizens. Since treason is a crime against the people as a whole, it has occupied a special category in the lexicon of crime. The severest penalty in the Criminal Code is usually reserved for traitors and the penalty is meant to serve as a symbol and warning to others that treason will not be tolerated.
The United States government has been involved in and assisted in the overthrow of foreign governments (more recently termed regime change) for decades, without the overt use of U.S. military force. Such operations are usually tasked to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Many of the governments targeted by the US have been democratically elected, rather than authoritarian governments or military dictatorships. In many cases the governments toppled were replaced by dictatorships, installed with assistance by the U.S. That is what the US did in Canada. The US government rigged the Canadian elections. There is evidence that the US government assassinated (assassination by induced cancer) NDP leader and 2011 federal election campaign favorite Jack Layton in order to install Stephen Harper as Prime Minister.
In 1975, during the US Church Committee hearings, the existence of a secret assassination weapon came to light. The CIA had developed a poison that caused the victim to have an immediate heart attack or be inflicted with cancer. This poison could be frozen into the shape of a dart and then fired at high speed from a pistol. The gun was capable of shooting the icy projectile with enough speed that the dart would go right through the clothes of the target and leave just a tiny red mark. Once in the body the poison would melt and be absorbed into the blood and cause a heart attack! The poison was developed to be undetectable by modern autopsy procedures. Only a very skilled pathologist, who knew exactly what to look for at an autopsy, could distinguish an assassination induced heart attack or cancer from the real thing.
Jack Ruby died of cancer a few weeks after his conviction for murder had been overruled in appeals court and he was ordered to stand trial outside of Dallas — thus allowing him to speak freely if he so desired. There was little hesitancy in Jack Ruby killing Lee Harvey Oswald in order to prevent him from talking, so there is no reason to suspect that any more consideration would have been shown Jack Ruby if he had posed a threat to people in the US government who had conspired to murder the president of the United States – John F Kennedy.
Matt Simmons, an oil industry expert, was assassinated for turning whistleblower over the Obama administration cover up of the BP Gulf Oil Spill. Investment banker Matt Simmons, who died suddenly, was an energy industry insider and presidential adviser whose profile soared when he wrote that Saudi Arabia is running out of oil and world production is peaking. Simmons, 67, died at his vacation home in Maine. An autopsy by the state medical examiner’s office concluded that he died from accidental drowning “with heart disease as a contributing factor.”
Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic was also assassinated. He was found dead in the detention centre at The Hague tribunal. Mr Milosevic faced charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity for his alleged central role in the wars in Bosnia, Croatia and Kosovo during the 1990s. He also faced genocide charges over the 1992-95 Bosnia war, in which 100,000 people died.
NATO’s Hague Tribunal was clearly a kangaroo court whose sole purpose was to convince ordinary people all over the world that NATO’s destruction of Yugoslavia was justified. Since NATO failed to show this in its own court (a total absence of evidence did make this difficult), there is indeed a powerful NATO motive to murder Milosevic – to prevent his acquittal. In this way, NATO can continue to claim that Milosevic was guilty, and nobody would begin to look into the mountain of evidence that showed that it was NATO leaders (particularly US president Bill Clinton) who committed war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Yugoslavia.
So many people have been done in by cancer at a convenient time in history that it is now time to ask the question “who is assassinating people by giving their target cancer or inducing a massive heart attack”? Who ordered the hits and why?
Mr. Charles Senseney, a CIA weapon developer at Fort Detrick, Maryland, testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee in September 1975 where he described an umbrella poison dart gun he had made. He said it was always used in crowds with the umbrella open, firing through the webbing so it would not attract attention. Since it was silent, no one in the crowd could hear it and the assassin merely would fold up the umbrella and saunter away with the crowd. Video footage of the assassination of John F Kennedy shows this umbrella gun being used in Dealey Plaza. Video evidence of the events of November 22, 1963 shows that the first shot fired on the fateful day had always seemed to have had a paralytic effect on Kennedy. His fists were clenched and his head, shoulders and arms seemed to stiffen. An autopsy revealed that there was a small entrance wound in his neck but no evidence of a bullet path through his neck and no bullet was ever recovered that matched that small size.
For over 50 years assassinations have been carried out so skillfully as to leave the impression that the victims died from natural causes. Details of some of the techniques used to achieve this were brought to light in 1961 when professional KGB assassin Bogdan Stashinskiy defected to the West and revealed that he had successfully performed two such missions. In 1957 he killed Ukrainian emigré writer Lev Rebet in Munich with a poison vapor gun which left the victim dead of an apparent heart attack. In 1959, the same type of weapon was used on Ukrainian emigré leader Stepan Bandera, although Bandera’s death was never fully accepted as having been from natural causes.
Among the witnesses, important people and conspirators who might have been eliminated by induced heart attack and cancer are: Jack Rudy (died of a stroke due to an undiagnosed form of aggressive cancer, just weeks after he agreed to testify before Congress about the JFK assassination), Clay Shaw, J. Edgar Hoover, Earlene Roberts (Oswald’s land-lady), Marlyn Monroe, Slobodan Milosevic, Kenneth Lay (former CEO of ENRON – the largest political campaign contributor of Gorge W Bush and Dick Cheney), Matt Simmons, Mark Pittman (a reporter who predicted the financial crisis and exposed Federal Reserve misdoings. Pittman fought to open the Federal Reserve to more scrutiny), Elizabeth Edwards. (suddenly diagnosed with cancer while her husband was campaigning against Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for the presidency of the United States. During a campaign speech to the Council on Foreign Relations in May 2007, Edwards called the War on Terrorism a slogan that was created for political reasons and that it wasn’t a plan to make the United States safe. He went further to compare it to a bumper sticker and that it had damaged the US’s alliances and standing in the world.), … enter here the names of every politically outspoken person, whistle blower or witness who died unexpectedly of a heart attack or who quickly died of an incurable cancer.
Jack Layton can be added to the list of political figureheads assassinated by the US government. Why did the US assassinate Jack Layton? Jack Layton put Canada and Canadians first. Stephen Harper puts the US agenda first. Jack Layton worked for the Canadian people and Canadian interests. Stephen Harper works for the US and imposes US foreign policy on Canadians. Stephen Harper is working with the US through the US Council on Foreign Relations. The US Council on Foreign Relations was formed to promote US foreign interests and its true purpose is to annex Canada.
Aiding and abetting the United States in the annexing of Canada isn’t Stephen Harper’s only crimes. Stephen Harper is divulging guarded and protected state secrets to the United States. A person commits “treason” who b) discloses, without lawful authority, military or scientific material to agents of a foreign state, if he or she knows or should know that the material may be used to impair Canada’s safety or defence. Harmonization, collaboration and information-sharing with the US Department of Homeland Security is treason. Harper knows that his unlawful actions can and will impair Canada’s sovereignty, financial prosperity and defence.
Eventually the U.S. government will simply eliminate the Canadian government and all Canada’s identities – our flag, our Canadian Dollar and even the name Canada – and take over Canada. Harper knows that this is the long term goal of the United States corporate controlled government. Harper persistently sought a majority government – to assume, without lawful authority, the means to dissolve Canada.
The Canadian Criminal Code criminalizes these acts committed by Stephen Harper. Harper’s secretive deals are an attack against the Canadian government and the Canadian people. Harper’s unilateral and clandestine deals with a foreign state are acts of treason as he is a person who is conspiring with a foreign state to undermine and eliminate the territorial sovereignty of Canada, and engaging in acts that he knows will harm and impair the safety and defense of Canada. Attempting to overthrow the government of Canada, spying for a foreign power, revealing state secrets, are considered in peacetime to constitute the crime of “treason” and their perpetrators are traitors.
What must be done to prevent Harper from further harming and undermining the sovereignty of Canada? What can you and I do? Remember that Harper works for Canada and Canadians. Harper is paid by us to protect and defend Canada, its borders, its people and its financial prosperity. Harper is under contract to the Canadian people. If he or anyone else breaches his or her contract to Canada and the Canadian people he or she can be fired. Harper doesn’t have the right to be Prime Minister. Being Prime Minister is a privilege. That privilege can be stripped away at any time when he commits acts of high treason or treason against Canada and the Canadian people. If Harper aids and abets a foreign state to cause a threat to our nation’s safety and defense then charges of treason can be laid against Harper. Harper is not the Canadian government. He is a person. He is a person in the government of Canada who is willfully and deliberately committing high treason and treason by conspiring with the United States to attack our system of government, our territorial boundaries, our sovereignty and our financial prosperity. Harper is working for and in the interest of the United States government.
You would think that Stephen Harper’s actions would alarm Queen Elizabeth II as Stephen Harper is aiding and abetting the US in the infiltration of all Canadian government agencies with armed US agents and soldiers. The Prime Minister of Canada is the primary minister of the Crown. The Canadian prime minister serves at Her Majesty’s pleasure. At Her Majesty’s pleasure is a legal term derived from all legitimate authority for government stems from the Crown. Harper isn’t allowing armed British agents and troops to infiltrate and occupy the Queen’s sovereign called Canada he is aiding and abetting the US government armed agents and troops to infiltrate and subvert Canada’s sovereign authority.
Why hasn’t Elizabeth taken action against Stephen Harper and ousted him for treachery? Because her legitimate authority as Queen of Canada could easily be challenged and refuted in a court of law. How so? Read presscore.ca article titled; “British Monarchy ended with Edward VIII abdication. Elizabeth “assumed” the crown without lawful authority – under false pretense – obtained the crown by intentionally misrepresenting a past or existing fact. Elizabeth isn’t the lawful heir to the throne. She is an impostor – a fraud. According to UK laws and line of succession laws Elizabeth is not the Queen of the UK or Canada or any Commonwealth state. Only the children of a reigning king or queen are legitimate heirs to the throne, and only after the “death” of the reigning king or queen. Elizabeth and her father George VI fraudulently assumed the throne as neither were King Edward VIII’s children and King Edward VIII didn’t die as required by law. His abdication (also required by law) ended the German monarchy over the UK and Canada.
Acts offending the Queen’s Duty, Honor, Country
Contrary to belief and misconception that Canada’s military, police and elected officials hold no official allegiance to Canada, the Canadian people nor any notion of constitution (law), there is an oath that binds our police, our military and our elected officials to protect Canada and Canadians from “Enemies Foreign & Domestic.”
Canada’s military, police and elected officials take the oath of allegiance to the Queen who takes an Oath to Canada. http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN00435.pdf – 28. The Crown’s duty towards the subject.
Since Queen Elizabeth II is the Queen of Canada, she must, according to the 1689 Oath, takes an Oath to rule according to the laws of Canada. If our laws says Stephen Harper’s actions are treason and high treason she, the Queen, must, by oath, uphold the laws of Canada.
The monarch, is bound by “Oath” to uphold all Canadian Laws. The Coronation Oath Act 1688 is an Act of the Parliament of England. It was passed in 1689. The preamble noted that “by the Law and Ancient Usage of this Realm” the monarchs of England had taken a solemn oath at their coronation “to maintain the statute laws and customs of the country and of its inhabitants”. It established a single uniform oath to be taken by future monarchs at their coronation.
The text of the accession declaration, as laid down in the Accession Declaration Act 1910 is as follows:
“I, ELIZABETH do solemnly and sincerely in the presence of God profess, testify, and declare that I am a faithful Protestant, and that I will, according to the true intent of the enactments which secure the Protestant succession to the Throne, uphold and maintain the said enactments to the best of my powers according to law.” ~ November 4, 1952
The legal obligations surrounding the oath are set out in Halsbury’s Laws:
28. The Crown’s duty towards the subject. The essential duties of the Crown towards the subject are now to be found expressed in the terms of the oaths which every monarch is required to take before or at the coronation. The duties imposed by the coronation oath are:
(1) to govern the peoples of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the dominions etc belonging or pertaining to them according to their respective laws and customs;
(2) to cause law and justice in mercy to be executed in all judgments, to the monarch’s power;
As the Queen is bound by oath “to govern the peoples of” the dominion of Canada … “according to their respective laws and customs” and “to cause law and justice in mercy to be executed in all judgments, to the monarch’s power;” then so to must Canada’s military, police (RCMP) and elected officials.
So in effect, Canada’s military, police and elected officials are sworn to protect the Queen’s Duty, honor, and country called Canada.
Coronation Oath of 1689
Whereas by the law and ancient usage of this Realm, the Kings and Queens thereof have taken a solemn oath upon the Evangelists at their respective coronations, to maintain the statutes, laws, and customs of the said Realm, and all the people and inhabitants thereof, in their spiritual and civil rights and properties: but forasmuch as the oath itself on such occasion administered, hath heretofore been framed in doubtful words and expressions, with relation to ancient laws and constitutions at this time unknown: to the end therefore that one uniform oath may be in all times to come taken by the Kings and Queens of this Realm, and to them respectively administered at the times of their and every of their coronation: may it please your Majesties that it may be enacted:
And be it enacted by the King’s and Queen’s most excellent majesties, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and the Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, That the oath herein mentioned, and hereafter expressed, shall and may be administered to their most excellent majesties … at the time of their coronation, in the presence of all persons that shall be then and there present at the solemnizing thereof, by the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the Archbishop of York, or either of them, or any other bishop of this Realm, whom the King Queen’s majesty shall thereunto appoint, and who shall be hereby thereunto respectively authorized; which oath followeth, and shall be administered in this manner; that is to say,
The archbishop of bishop shall say, “Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern the people of this Kingdom of England, and the dominions thereto belonging, according to the statutes in Parliament agreed on, and the laws and customs of the same?”
The Queen responded, “I solemnly promise so to do.”
Archbishop or bishop, “Will you to your power cause law and justice in mercy to be executed in all your judgments?”
The Queen responded, “I will.”