TURMEL: Censors exposed at Wikipedia corrupted mine too
KingofthePaupers
is an article about how people tamper with the wiki historical
record in several ways including erasing corrections. I can
believe it because that's what happened to what they say about
me at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Turmel
This biographical article needs additional citations for
verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious
material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced
must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous
or harmful. (February 2008)
(Find sources: John C. Turmel - news, books, scholar)
The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the
discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message
until the dispute is resolved. (July 2009)
JCT: Anyway, people are arguing about what they're going to say
about me. But I've corrected errors or wrong implications on my
page, always leaving my name as affidavit to the correction.
But here's what happened!
A while ago, I corrected my Wikipedia page where they implied I
had become the leader of the Social Credit Party of Ontario in
some shady way, not knowing if the old members of the party had
consented. So I edited it to explain that at a meeting of the
registered candidates for the 1981 Ontario general election,
leader Reg Gervais resigned because he could not run in the
election with us and none of the old guard were either, and I was
appointed "interim" leader by the candidates who were running, me
in as a Social Credit Party of Ontario candidate in Ottawa
Centre, while brother Raymond ran for the party in Ottawa South,
Serge Girard in Ottawa East, Dale Alkerton in Ottawa West and
Andrew Dynowski in Ottawa-Nepean. I became the "interim" leader
of the Social Credit Party of Ontario because I was the leader of
the Ottawa Socred Five who were entering the arena under the
Social Credit Party of Ontario banner while the rest of the old
guard had run out of steam. Sure, the article mentions how the
out-of-steamers came back to oust me and how the party continued
on to nowhere comes later.
Having been associated with several small parties, I've noticed
interesting patterns in how bankster moles infiltrate and destroy
small reform parties. Not in how they might corrupt governments,
The Economic Hit Man's book explains that, or in how they corrupt
the anti-prohibition movements by leading them, but in how Big
Money breaks small political parties with the cheapest expedient,
part-time moles.
For instance, many guys running marijuana head shops getting
regular cash for regular info, guys running marijuana seeds lists
(by your friendly narc mole), guys running your marijuana
magazines and passing them off as heroes while they stumble their
way from one sabotage to the next. They know everything. We can't
hide.
So how do you destroy small political parties? They'll send you
in to argue with the Teacher no matter how inane the questions
make you look, (see my debates with Professor Flaherty, Bill
Ryan, and innumerable "L is for Local LETSers" who never saw the
big picture even if the UN Millennium Assembly did in Resolution
C6 to Governments for "time-based currency"). People are going to
say: let's not go there, they're always arguing.
If you can't beat the Teacher, go in with another moles to argue
with you not as well as the prof who has to keep helping him but
keeping the arguing going on so others want to stay home.
But let's say that there's enough control to keep you muzzled and
people are learning truth anyway, especially when you're not
around.
But, keep in mind the other guy who argued against you is now in
deep with the leadership as the defender of the faith for the
team, the champion for our side. After all, he's the guy who
defeated you. In truth, you're the guy who took the steered the
fight to make him the champion, soon leader, of their team.
And of course, as long as no real reform ever finds action,
everybody's happy to get together at the annual meeting, talk
about old times when such and such got 8% of the vote, until the
party basically dies out for want of focus, or worse, direction.
Now we're talking one political hit man, sometimes two, who can
take out one small movement but they can afford many more since
they print the money.
That's how the controllers' moles do in political parties. When a
new party or politically on-target politician comes on the scene,
their moles join up and become good members rising in the
hierarchy until most of the moles are at the top. Read Fletcher
Prouty's Secret Team to see how the CIA buys all the university
sharpies into their control. No one knew East Germany was paying
1/3 to watch the other 2/3 so don't say it can't be done now...
better... Lots better.
In general, part-time moles enter a party, group, council,
church, organization and are paid to stay with it while it's
alive ready to do the dirty deed when called on, hopefully,
never. Like judges, more often.
Now look at the regulars in any small old almost dead political
parties and you're going to see the remnants of the mole
structure. As long as it's going nowhere, fine, but they're
always there ready to do the dirty deed. If ever I'd say: Let's
use LETS to give ourselves interest-free loans?" there'd be a
chorus of "Too complicated, not interested, can't be done. Are
you an economist?" Today I'd answer: "Are you a climatologist?"
though I say: "I'm an engineer, better on the banking system than
those clowns," a handy specialization. No one can argue with me
without being made fun of. And it's fun for the watchers who
understand what's going on while my opponent doesn't get the
zingers that make people laugh. But moles aren't interested in a
happy solution and put up a fight for fight's sake. So I call
them Morons or Moles, Fools or Tools of the Yoke of Oppression.
So it makes sense that as time goes on, a higher and higher
proportion of the guys remaining at the small-party-sapping
trough are moles whose purpose was to make sure it went nowhere.
And if the project makes money while going nowhere and you get
rich and even steal it all, money can get you off! Or pardoned
(by Bush). Lots of tricks of their trade.
When a real reformer comes into the game, then watch them come
out from under cover. Again, my fight to decriminalize marijuana
in Canada (I don't want it criminalized) provides moles' covers
blown a-plenty.
- Canada's top hero lawyer Alan Young blew his cover stabbing
Parker in the back to help the Crown Parker's set aside
Protection from the Pitt J. Judgment by a mere peer judge!
- And Marc-Boris St-Maurice, leader of the Marijuana Party of
Canada, who refused to continue with the advertised leadership
convention election because I had showed up to run. Another mole
bites the dust though you hear him barking in the background once
in a while still.
- Canada's premier publisher, Marc The Narc Emery, passing
himself off as a a "Prince of Pot," (a nickel-dimer prancing
around flaunting a few grams while the King of Pot was getting
busted on Parliament Hill with 3,300 grams) suppresses what Alan
Young helping the Crown take away the Pitt Protection from
Canada's most famous exempted person. Talk about blowing his
cover, covering up his champion Alan Young's stabbing his good
friend Terry in the back to help the Crown.
And he covered up the Paquette Exemption Prolongation Federal
Court win for him and every exemptee facing an expiring exemption
the chance to renew with only the signature of the doctor and not
the Specialist the new rules gave them only 6 months to come up
with.
What Hellth Canada monsters! Almost no exemptees had renewed and
almost all were facing their expiry "deadlines" (stress maybe
kills?) and after I forced the same Paquette Card three times at
the Crown, they gave up and offered him a 1-doctor exemption
prolongation form. Ailing Marc Paquette was heroic in trusting me
when I told he had to go back in there a third time for the same
thing because of the appearance of our "miracle" OMA letter from
Thunderbay, and sure enough, he won. He won a victory to help
every one of the thousand of so exemptees facing renewal. Ask
Marc what a relief it was to have his doctor sign off with more
time to find that pesky specialist where only 1 doctor in 60, if
they're all different signers and they're not.
We were all under incredible stress. Me too. How do you think I
felt? Third time, same request, last time nasty (I think, All in
the medpot record). I say the Thunderbay fax was a miracle card.
It would make them look so bad that the Ontario Medical
Association had officially advised doctors not to participate in
the MMAR and if it ever got the Main Stream Media's notice, and
it did in those days, (before the 4k charges dropped) they'd be
exposed in all their cruelty to a guy with deadly illness. And
others.
The Health Canada application examiners were a bunch of narc
pharmacists brought over from Justice Canada when medical use
became legal to argue with the doctors and make applying so
horribly unpleasant, they won't want to do it twice. Effective.
And some of their tactics could stall an exemption 2 years before
they'd send a "letter of intent to deny!" So you have to go back
and argue with your doctor some more so he can argue with Health
Canada pharmacists some more. Remember, I kept laughing that
letting doctors be checked by pharmacists is as silly as letting
engineers be checked by stock-boys. Insulting to the engineers
and doctors, and creating a profession-wide aversion to marijuana
as a medication. Effective.
And the Prince of Pot sat on the story and let every exemptee in
Canada not know about the Third Play of the Paquette Card that
won them instant renewal with a signature from their doctor. And
Health Canada didn't inform the doctors either. With Emery also
suppressing that good news and letting those exemptees hit the
expiry wall, his pleading guilty to go to jail for 3 months when
the government lawyers admit they know the law's been dead for
the past 6 years was particularly hilarious. And now that he's
pleading guilty to go to jail again in the US, I can only hope he
enjoys whatever fetish he has that can only be satisfied behind
bars.
So virtually all the guys at the top of the marijuana movement
fought against my abolishing prohibition of marijuana, if their
resistance is any indication of intent rather than stumbling.
So back to moles working the information databases. Sure, the
Wiki writers put in that I was ousted:
"In October, the Ontario Social Credit Party conducted a
leadership vote. The eleven delegates, who represented about 100
party members throughout the province, elected former Toronto
mayoral candidate Anne McBride as their new interim leader in a
vote of 7 to 1 with 3 spoiled ballots."
JCT: Notice she was elected "interim leader," not "leader?"
That's because it had not given the 60-days notice for a legal
convention for the leadership so they help this snap unheard of
convention to pick a new "interim" leader right away. They were
in such a rush to make sure I wasn't leader for long that they
couldn't wait to have a constitutional election. Turmel's that
terrible, it just had to be done. And they did.
So if you go back to my last edit of my bio at Wiki, you'll find
the version which I had accepted as the basic, if not full,
truth. I corrected every clear error but I wasn't going to spend
my life filling in the gaps which, left out, might make for a
different story. The truth will someday out anyway. But the
"interim leadership" is a clear giveaway of how they didn't play
fair to oust me when all the President and Executive had to do
was send out a notice of convention with the proper number of
days notice. Of course, that would have given me a chance to
organize the new kids in the arena to come to the convention so
they needed a snap convention, though unconstitutional, and tell
it like a legal ousting. So I did not consider it worth
correcting the impression that I had been legally out-voted for
the job because it'll come out some day later.
But that kind of filling the gap correction I'll overlook. But
when when I take the time to correct the record and then someone
changes it back to the ambiguous, that I cannot overlook. My
explanation has been changed back to:
"It was reported that he became interim leader of the Ontario
Social Credit Party in early March, although it is not clear if
other members of the party agreed."
JCT: Someone cut out Gervais' resignation to explain how I got to
be interim leader to make it "not clear" again.
Remember, I have to sign my name to these corrections. Others
like the censor cited above, with behind the scenes powers, can
register with Wikipedia so they don't sign when they change
things. I never registered because I insist on leaving my name in
case anyone wants to put their money where their mouth is.
So why would whoever change the truth back to ambiguity?
I'm not even going to answer raised a second time when Wikipedia
has no way of ensuring that the censors and smearers aren't
running the data.