Did we miss something?
They can no longer claim that they didn’t know as IGNORANCE to these massive issues can no longer be their excuse.
These are the perfect reasons why we need Pure Direct Democracy in Canada (People above Government) and NOT more of the same BS under Proportional Representation.
UPDATE: 322 Canadian MPs and 86 Senators with 1 reply (PDF) have been sent this email, along with 125 Quebec MPPs, 85 British Columbia MPPs, 84 Alberta MPPs, 61 Saskatchewan MPPs, Manitoba 57 MPPs, 106 Ontario MPPs, 49 New Brunswick MPPs, 51 Nova Scotia MPP’s, 40 Newfoundland and Labrador MPPs, 25 Prince Edward Island MPPs, 20 Northwest Territories MPPs, 19, Yukon MPPs, including the Auditor Generals for both Canada and Ontario, the Ontario Ombudsman and to the 31 Assembly of First Nations (AFN) contacts – Canadian and Provincial Government Governance and Political Fraud since 1931_ on August 26, 2016
You can write them too, the email lists are provided below.
Let’s see what happens…
Have you signed away your proxy to Perry Bellegarde?
When did AFN become the New Government for all Indigenous Nations in Canada
or is it more BAIT & SWITCH FRAUD and signed with no date inserted? (see document below)
AFN is made up of mostly Band Councils which are in FACT extensions of the Canadian Government as their Agents.
Who are International Corporations really negotiating with and do they even know the difference?
Wait till their shareholders find out!
OPEN LETTER and Official Request for:
An immediate investigation into International Investment Fraud being COMMITTED within INDIGENOUS (North American Indian) TREATY COUNTRIES, namely “CANADA and the USA”, in the names of the Canadian Citizens by the Canadian Federal, Provincial and Territorial Governments and their representatives within all National and International Trade Deals such as; NAFTA, THE TPP, TTIP, CETA, SPP TRADE DEALS AND ALL OTHER NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATIONS BEING PERPETRATED WITHOUT THE SIGNED CONSENT OR AUTHORITY OF THE PROXY SIGNATORIES within the INDIGENOUS INDIAN; FIRST NATIONS, METIS AND INUIT PEOPLES ACROSS CANADA, USA AND MEXICO.
To whom this may concern;
- SCOTLAND YARD
- THE SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE
- THE NATIONAL WHITE COLLAR CRIME CENTRE OF CANADA
- US SECRET SERVICE
- FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONS
National and International White Collar Crimes regarding National and International Trade Negotiations regarding Land and Energy International Trade Deal Negotiations WITHIN THE PROVINCES OF CANADA:
- International and National Trade Negotiations Misrepresentation
- Investment Fraud
- Money Laundering
- Conflict of Interest and Misrepresentation of Fiduciary Duty
White Collar Crimes being committed specifically within National and International Trade Deals and Negotiations by the Unconstitutional DE FACTO (since 1931) Canadian Federal, Provincial and territorial 3rd party Governments without the authority of the peoples affected through deliberately denying the Canadian Citizens a proper decolonization process and the opportunity to enact a new Constitution to replace our existing DE Facto Constitution since the Statute of Westminster was put in full force and effect in Canada in 1931:
COMPREHENSIVE LAND CLAIMS, SPECIFIC CLAIMS, PAST, PRESENT AND MODERN DAY TREATIES HAVE YET TO BE NEGOTIATED OR FINALIZED AND RATIFIED WITH THE INDIAN; FIRST NATIONS, METIS AND INUIT OF NORTH AMERICA AND THE CANADIAN AND US CITIZENS WHICH WILL DIRECTLY AFFECT ALL NEGOTIATING COUNTRY STAKE HOLDERS AND CORPORATE SHARE HOLDERS WITHIN ALL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS SUCH AS; such as NAFTA, THE TPP, TTIP, CETA, SPP TRADE DEALS AND ALL OTHER NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATIONS BEING PERPETRATED WITHOUT THE SIGNED CONSENT OR AUTHORITY OF THE PROXY SIGNATORIES INDIGENOUS INDIAN; FIRST NATIONS, METIS AND INUIT RELATIONS ACROSS CANADA, USA AND MEXICO.
The initial trespass, misrepresentation and fraud perpetuated by all parties involved within these International Trade Negotiations involve access to Lands under the North American Indian; Indigenous OUR INDIAN; FIRST NATIONS, METIS AND INUIT Nations Communal Ownership Jurisdictions.
Crimes Committed by:
- Representatives of The Government of Canada
- Representatives of The Ontario Provincial Government
- Provincial and Territorial Governments of Canada
- Ontario Ministry of Energy
- Indigenous and Northern Affairs
- Assembly of First Nations ( AFN IMPERSONATION)
- International Trade Negotiators
- Members of the United Nations Steering Committees
- The World Trade Organization and participating Countries
- International Corporations
- John Doe et al
Initial status of complaint regarding: International and National Trade Negotiation misrepresentation, International Investment Fraud , Money Laundering, Conflict of Interest and misrepresentation to Fiduciary Duty being OPENLY committed by Band Councils across Canada, AFN, Indigenous and Northern Affairs, Ministry of Ontario Energy and other Canadian and Federal Government Agencies which will affect all “International Trade Deals” especially The Canadian, US and EU countries within the World Trade Organization, whose shareholders will inadvertently be affected by being deliberately mislead by the participants and the multi-levels of Canadian Federal and Provincial legislatures in regards to a false authority within Canada and the USA in regards to sustainable energy development on lands and territories not yet in full jurisdictional control of the Canadian and Provincial Governments and the Canadian Publicly owned corporations until the Comprehensive Land Claims, existing Treaties and Modern Day Treaties are respected finalized and ratified AND AGREED UPON by the North American Indian; Indigenous First Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples in each of Canada , USA and Mexico and the Canadian and US Citizens.
An immediate International investigation needs to be launched and immediate moratoriums in each of the Canadian Provinces and the US States need to be firmly put in place before anyone can proceed with such negotiations that affect all Indian; Indigenous First Nations, Métis and Inuit Peoples in North America and the Canadian and US citizens.
Furthermore all levels of Governance within Canada, the USA, Mexico and all other signatory Countries including National and International Corporations should not be negotiating assets that they do not have final jurisdiction over.
International Investment Fraud and Money Laundering within Canada, the USA affecting all existing International Trade Deals and ongoing negotiations such as the NAFTA, the TPP, CETA, TTIP etc. and those in regards to Environment and Sustainable Development Commissions overseeing these fraudulent Trade negotiations are committing International Fraud and are in Breach of Fiduciary Duty relevant to all Indian; Indigenous First Nations, Métis and Inuit Peoples ( Canada, USA and Mexico) their Crown Lands and Territories in Canada and the United States still presently held in trust and under fiduciary responsibility by both the US federal and State Governments and the Canadian Federal and Provincial Governments .
PLEASE NOTE: The people representing First Nations Band Councils in Canada are representatives (Government Agencies) as stated by the Crown of Canada which in fact means that they are NOT proxy signatory representatives of the Indigenous Indian; First Nations, Métis and Inuit Peoples with proxy rights to their past, existing and future Treaties.
IMPORTANT: PLEASE SEE THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
RE: AFN AND INDIAN AFFAIRS FRAUD IN MISREPRESENTATION (ONLY AN ADVOCACY GROUP) AS THE FALSE REPRESENTATION FOR THE NATIONS ACROSS CANADA.
Let it be clear that neither: Perry Bellegarde of The Assembly of First Nations (AFN) representative, Indigenous and Northern Affairs Minister Carolyn Bennett, Premier Kathleen Wynne, nor Prime Minister Justin Trudeau have such an Authority within Canada to make final decisions for our peoples.
Please be informed that: “Fiduciary Duty description” does NOT extend the rights of the Federal or Provincial Government in Canada and in the USA to have explicit authority to make decisions that indicates conflict of interest while manipulating their duty to all Indigenous Nations of North America know to us all as the official home of Turtle Island which covers Canada, the USA and Mexico.
PLEASE BE FURTHER ADVISED OF AN IMPORTANT SUPREME COURT CASE THAT ESTABLISHED PRECEDENCE MAY 9, 2013 REQUIRING ALL THOSE CLAIMING TO BE REPRESENTING THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES NEED 51% MAJORITY SIGNATURES OF ALL OF THE REGISTERED PEOPLE OVER THE AGE OF 18 WITHIN THEIR TERRITORIES.
Please refer to: BEHN V. MOULTON SUPREME COURT DECISION regarding the PRECEDENCE DETERMINED as of MAY 9, 2013. Anyone claiming to represent the Bands, will require a 51% majority of the Bands to provide signed documentation specifying WHOM THEY WISH TO BE REPRESENTED to speak during certain deliberations as their representatives, which needs to be implemented prior to undertaking true representation to express and to certify that they in fact do have the majority of the peoples mandate.
This also means that 51% consensus needs to be reached by the registered members as equal communal shareholders regarding all of THEIR assets within THEIR Territories, monetary holdings, Crown Lands held in trust under Fiduciary Duty by the Canadian Federal and Provincial Governments would also be required to carry the mandate of all of the Indian; Indigenous First Nations, Métis and Inuit Peoples within Canadian Law over the age of 18.
Again to be clear: the Band Councils, nor the Canadian and Provincial Governments or the Assembly of First Nations, or The Indigenous and Northern Affairs Agencies have the authority to speak for the entirety of all of the Indian; Indigenous First Nations, Métis and Inuit Peoples over the age of 18, nor do they have the required signatory mandate issued by the majority of the People.
Their fraudulently imposed authority creates a misrepresentation by all parties at the negotiation tables placing them in breach of trust, misrepresentation and fraudulent International Trade negotiations as well as perpetrating money laundering in which we have sufficient proof in regards to all that affects them.
International Public and Private Corporations such as Samsung and their shareholders and all of the International Corporations involved with the Ontario Government and the Ontario Ministry of Energy International trade deals involving public corporations like Hydro One owned by the Citizens of Ontario and all other energy subsidiaries and their shareholders etc., have undoubtedly been mislead constituting our unknown participation in International Fraud activities and Money Laundering such as can be proven within documents by all those being at the negotiation tables regarding National and International Trade Deals, not only in Ontario, but within all of Canada.
The initial trespass, misrepresentation and fraud committed by all parties involved within these International Trade Negotiations involve a complete misrepresentation of the First Nations Jurisdiction which has enable our Governments illegal access to lands by these band Councillors or Representatives such as being done by Canadian Lawyers and all other Trade Negotiators within International and National Corporations also further causing environmental and health issues within the First Nations Communities and Territories further usurping all of their Indian; Indigenous First Nations, Métis and Inuit Peoples Communal Ownership Jurisdictions and PROXY signatories consensus on their decision making authority regarding all of their assets and Jurisdictions.
As a Canadian Citizen, I am appalled that our Canadian and USA Governments and the United Nations have revoked all of our decision making authority through claiming to be of Authority with our countries by instilling illicit laws, turning our Countries into dictatorship governance and further usurping all of our sovereign authority through retaining VETO power over all Countries and Nations. However, there is one hope to clean this mess up and that is to place moratoriums within the trade deals while the proper lawful protocols are undertaken as to not allowing our governments to keep committing fraudulent activities in our names.
BEHN V. MOULTON SUPREME COURT DECISION
May 16, 2013
On May 9, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Behn v. Moulton Contracting Ltd., 2013 SCC 26, affirming that Aboriginal groups seeking to challenge the validity of permits or authorizations granted to resource developers must follow the legislatively mandated process to do so.
In striking these defences, the Court considered whether (a) the Behns, as individual members of FNFN, had standing to assert FNFN’s collective Aboriginal rights; and (b) it was an abuse of process to plead that the Authorizations were void due to an alleged failure to consult.
The Court affirmed the existing jurisprudence that the Crown’s duty to consult is owed to the Aboriginal group that holds section 35 rights and can only be asserted by individuals when they have been authorized by the group to do so. Since no such authorization was issued by FNFN, the Behns had no standing to assert a breach of the duty to consult.
See official COURT STATEMENTS and links TO THE OFFICIAL DOCUMENT THAT SETS PRECEDENCE below
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA
|Citation: Behn v. Moulton Contracting Ltd., 2013 SCC 26,  2 S.C.R. 227||Date: 20130509
Sally Behn, Susan Behn, Richard Behn, Greg Behn, Rupert Behn,
Lovey Behn, Mary Behn, George Behn
Moulton Contracting Ltd. and Her Majesty the Queen in
Right of the Province of British Columbia
– and –
Attorney General of Canada, Chief Liz Logan, on behalf of herself and all
other members of the Fort Nelson First Nation and the said Fort Nelson
First Nation, Grand Council of the Crees (Eeyou Istchee)/Cree Regional Authority,
Chief Sally Sam, Maiyoo Keyoh Society, Council of Forest Industries,
Alberta Forest Products Association and Moose Cree First Nation
Excerpts from The Supreme Court decision:
 Three issues must be addressed in this appeal. First, can the Behns, as individual members of an Aboriginal community, assert a breach of the duty to consult? This issue raises the question to whom the Crown owes a duty to consult. Second, can treaty rights be invoked by individual members of an Aboriginal community? These two issues relate to standing.
 According to the Crown, the collective nature of Aboriginal and treaty rights means that claims in relation to such rights must be brought by, or on behalf of, the Aboriginal community. Although the Crown recognizes the Behns’ interest in their treaty rights, it submits that their position on this issue disregards two factors: (1) the issue arising in the litigation concerns a defence to a claim related to a blockade, not to the exercise of hunting or trapping rights; and (2) the FNFN is named as a party to the proceedings and therefore represents the community in them. The Crown further submits that having a substantial and direct interest in a treaty right does not entitle an individual to bring a treaty rights claim or defence.
(1) Duty to Consult
 In defence to Moulton’s claim, as I mentioned above, the Behns argue, inter alia, that their conduct was not illegal, because the Crown had issued the Authorizations in breach of the duty to consult and the Authorizations were therefore invalid. The question that arises with respect to this particular defence is whether the Behns can assert the duty to consult on their own in the first place.
 In this appeal, it does not appear from the pleadings that the FNFN authorized George Behn or any other person to represent it for the purpose of contesting the legality of the Authorizations. I note, though, that it is alleged in the pleadings of other parties before this Court that the FNFN had implicitly authorized the Behns to represent it. As a matter of fact, the FNFN was a party in the proceedings in the courts below, because Moulton was arguing that it had combined or conspired with others to block access to Moulton’s logging sites. The FNFN is also an intervener in this Court. But, given the absence of an allegation of an authorization from the FNFN, in the circumstances of this case, the Behns cannot assert a breach of the duty to consult on their own, as that duty is owed to the Aboriginal community, the FNFN. Even if it were assumed that such a claim by individuals is possible, the allegations in the pleadings provide no basis for one in the context of this appeal.
French and English PDF of Court Decision
Below is a sound clarification of what every Human Being and every National and International Corporate(paper)Entity and Country must know PRIOR to entering into negotiations regarding North American Indians; First Nations, Métis and Inuit including the Peoples of Mexico that have to be considered and respected within all International Trade Deals within Canada, and the USA before any negotiations can be entered into since we still are Treaty BOUND Countries:
The principles for treaty making with Aboriginal peoples were articulated by King George III in the Royal Proclamation of 1763, which established the constitutional foundations of Canada after the government of France withdrew its claims to North America. The constitutional character of past and future treaties between Aboriginal peoples and the Crown was renewed in the Constitution Act of 1982, which describes itself as “the supreme law of Canada.” Section 35 of that document both recognizes and affirms “existing Aboriginal and treaty rights.”
In 1990, the Supreme Court of Canada in the Sioui case determined that “treaties and statutes relating to Indians should be liberally construed and uncertainties resolved in favour of the Indians.” In that case, the court introduced into Canadian jurisprudence a principle adopted from a 19th-century ruling in the United States that such treaties “must therefore be construed, not according to the technical meaning of its words to learned lawyers, but in the sense in which they would naturally be understood by the Indians.”
In spite of the constitutional character of treaties, these deals were often viewed cynically by those non-Aboriginal people responsible for both making and implementing them as cheap and expedient ways to strip Aboriginal title from most of the lands in Canada so that resources could be exploited by other groups.
The tendency on the part of federal and provincial governments has been to continue to interpret treaties as legalistically as possible, while holding to the position that Aboriginal peoples “ceded, surrendered, and yielded” all their Aboriginal rights and titles to their ancestral lands through treaties.
This narrow view of treaties essentially as real estate deals by which Aboriginal groups sold all their interest in vast parcels of land in exchange for reserves, small one-time payments and small continuing payments (usually five dollars per Treaty Indian per year) has produced a huge schism. On the one hand is the view of treaties as legal instruments that extinguished Aboriginal rights. On the other is the view of treaties as instruments of relationships between autonomous peoples who agree to share the lands and resources of Canada. Seen from this latter perspective, treaties did not extinguish rights but rather confirmed rights through recognizing that Aboriginal peoples have the capacity to act as self-governing participants on the international stage. Bridging the gap between these two views of treaties poses a huge challenge to the people and lawmakers of Canada.
We trust that this information and the fact that according to 3 Supreme Court Decisions as legal precedence and that the Governments worldwide including all International Court Judges and the Lawyers from BC, Canada and the United Nations and including the Vatican via the Statutes of ROME illegal Treaty/ Convention that originated and established the Internationals Crimes Courts Illegal and Neglectful Fiduciary Standing given the lack of attention given to the true precedence of the Indigenous Nations worldwide in assuming that they all hold authority over all of humanity will take all of this into deep thought and consideration since too many have neglected their true Fiduciary Duty to over 7 Billion People worldwide as we as the people are the Final Decision Makers in each of our countries.
NO International Courts can take itself as Judge and Jury for billions of people in each of our Countries unless they have a mandate signed directly by the people to do so and that International Corporate entities such as the United Nations and the World Trade Organization and the World Banks and the Vatican Doctrine’s of Discovery Papal Bull are to no longer assume a hierarchy above all the People in LAW to negotiate for any of the Indian; Indigenous First Nations, Métis and Inuit Peoples and that those claiming hierarchy need to acknowledge that these legal and lawful statements come from their own Laws and precedence’s set.
It is time that our Governing bodies, stop committing crimes in our names as these problems need to be immediately corrected and we hope that, this official criminal activities complaint will awaken the Investigative Agencies worldwide regarding International frauds being committed by those in Canada and at the international levels fully being aware of their misrepresenting the people and laundering funds utilizing innocent people and Corporations being affected that had no participation but were/are used to cover their money laundering crimes and to be reminded that the People are above Governance and not International Governance above the people which removes all of our Sovereign Jurisdiction within our Countries and interferes with Treaty Rights worldwide.
As per the Supreme Court Rulings and Precedence in needing signed authority by 51% majority of proxy signatories, then time will be needed to proceed as determined by the Supreme Courts of Canada and the USA, and Moratoriums immediately initiated worldwide before anyone can further any types of negotiations including renegotiating the International Trade deals such as NAFTA, THE TPP, TTIP, CETA, THE SPP TRADE DEALS AND ALL OTHER NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATIONS BEING PERPETRATED WITHOUT THE SIGNED CONSENT OR AUTHORITY OF THE PROXY SIGNATORIES WITHIN ALL NORTH AMERICAN INDIANS; INDIGENOUS FIRST NATIONS, METIS AND INUIT AND THE CITIZENS ACROSS CANADA, USA AND MEXICO ON BOTH SIDES OF THE TWO ROW TREATY as it is the Peoples will that decide what they want for their futures.
I thank you in advance for your time and look forward to being in contact with you all, regarding this extremely urgent matter that will unfortunately affect all Negotiating Country Stake Holders, International Trade Corporate Share Holders and International Stock Exchanges including too many innocent people and families worldwide BEFORE MORE INTERNATIONAL ILLEGAL TRADE DEALS ESPECIALLY WITH CANADA AND THE PROVINCES ARE FINALIZED.
Concerned Canadian Citizen
Representative for The Indigenous and Civil
Unified Sovereign Enactment Grassroots Movement
Signed with no date inserted and not a binding agreement? As you can clearly see, The Canadian Government is doing the same type of Agreements as the United Nations while misleading the People.
See the PDF proof here or click the photo below.
Here is the list of Canadian Federal MP’s for those who may want to email the Canadian Government regarding this obvious Fraud. (322)
Canadian Government Senators Email List (86)
Ontario Legislation MPP’s Email List (106)
firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,Jfraser.firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, LGretzkyCO@ndp.on.ca,email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,PHatfieldQP@ndp.on.ca, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,Pmilczyn.firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,Psattlerqp@ndp.on.ca, firstname.lastname@example.org,email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,firstname.lastname@example.org
Quebec Legislative Assembly (119)
BC Legislative Assembly (85)
Alberta Legislative Assembly (84)
Saskatchewan Legislative Assembly (61)
Manitoba Legislative Assembly (57)
New Brunswick Legislative Assembly (49)
Nova Scotia Legislative Assembly (59)
Newfoundland and Labrador Legislative Assembly (40)
Prince Edward Island Legislative Assembly (26)
Northwest Territories Legislative Assembly (20)
Yukon Legislative Assembly (19)
Nunavut (0) emails bounced.