You are on page 1of 21

Frank Gallagher

October 5 2008 34 Riverglen Drive


Keswick, on
Commissioner L4P 2P8
Conflict of Interest & Ethics
Mary Elizabeth Dawson www.cdf.name Manager
Charter Democracy Force
Re: Government Organized Crime

Federal Accountability Act, 2006

BENEVOLENCE, RIGHTEOUSNESS and MORALITY ploy

Dear Commissioner

Over the passed year I have sent you a preponderance of evidence requesting you investigate certain
personnel for conflict of interest & ethics

By your refusal to deal with these issues irrefutably proves the Accountability Act, 2006, which your
office was created is a pressure diffusion and squelch chamber initiated by the office of the Minister of
Justice and PMO.

This is their Modus Operandi when pressure is put on them to abide by the Constitution consistent with
every individual’s guaranteed Charter rights, which the Parliament of Canada enacted and passed on
the responsibility to the provinces to administer and enforce, purportedly without retaining some form
of compelling the provinces to do so.

A letter from the DOJ dated January 22 2007 signed by Brisbois clearly states they have no authority
over the provinces as they have autonomy.

This is obviously not true or the RCMP would not have been investing my complaint filed with the
Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP dated November 8 2007 against 2 RCMP
refusing to investigate Government Organized Crime of corruption and conspiracy in Ontario.

If they had no jurisdiction why did they spend a year investigating the evidence when all they had to
say was not our jurisdiction.

.The Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day is responsible to Parliament and to the public for the
RCMP and the RCMP Commissioner is a Deputy Minister of the federal government and the Minister
of Justice and Attorney General advises them along with every other government department and
agencies including all Ministers.

The RCMP Final Letter of Disposition dated September 3 2008 irrefutably proves the RCMP upper
echelon are in on the conspiracy and there is further evidence published on the RCMP Final Letter of
Disposition web site http://groups.google.com/group/rcmp-final-letter-of-disposition proving many
more refuse to investigate the irrefutable evidence of government Organized Crime.

All the evidence I previously provided you is published on the Charter Democracy Force web site
www.cdf.name and affiliate sites referenced thereon.

1
On the RCMP Final Letter of Disposition web site there is now irrefutable evidence the Minister of
Public Safety Stockwell Day, the RCMP Commissioner William Elliot and others of the RCMP are in
on the Government Organized Crime along with the Minister of Justice and Attorney General and the
Ontario Attorney General.

The Attorney General of Ontario is responsible as “guardian of the public interest” to demonstrate due
diligence consistent with Constitution conducive to every individual’s guaranteed Charter rights and
the evidence shows he never intended to and refuses to do so.

I have requested the RCMP to charge him and they have refused to do so.

The evidence is self explanatory and as there are many others yet to deal with I request you thoroughly
study the evidence to coherency consistent with the Constitution conducive to every individual’s
guaranteed Charter rights for the purpose of charging the aforementioned and referred to RCMP for
conflict of interest and ethics with the understanding further charges will be made.

Urgency is of the essence and I expect a response acknowledging receipt of this document promptly
“ConflictInterestCompiledOctober52008” which is published on the aforementioned RCMP Final
Letter of Disposition web site.

Thank you

Frank Gallagher
Manager
Charter Democracy Force

2
3
August 24, 2007

Dear Gisèle Bellehumeur

Please confirm that you have received copies of the following documents

Letter to Title Date # of


pages

Toronto Sun October 8 2006


73

Law Society of Upper Canada February 10 2007


36
Rick Hennessey ORHT Lawyer File #1 March 30 2007
11
Dave Grech MMAH #2
7
Hon. John Garettsen #3
10
Ombudsman #4
18
Julia Munro #5
6
Premier Dalton McGuinty #6
5
Attorney General Michael Bryant #7
14
OPP Randy Craig #8
38
YRP Bruce Herridge #9
22
OCCOPS Sheldon Prior #10
9
Judy Phillips #11 March 30 2007
12
#12 April 1 2007
18
Robert McCreary Crown Attorney #13 April 5 2007
1
Paul Culver Crown Attorney #13A April 5 2007
1
Michael Thomson RCMP #4 April 7 2007
4

4
Hon. John Garretsen June 20 2007
4
Michael Bryant In the spirit as well as the letter July 9 2007
3
Prime Minister Stephen Harper July 15 2007
9
Prime Minister Stephen Harper Accountability Act….Jesus takes the wheel July 17 2007
3
Prime Minister Stephen Harper Constitution Act, 1867 July 19 2007
1
Prime Minister Stephen Harper Dear Prime Minister July 19 2007
1
Ministry of Community Safety August 15 2007
7
Julia Munro August 21 2007
12

It is imperative that you study the evidence provided in the 73 page letter to the Toronto Sun dated
October 8 2006 until you are coherent to the fact that Don Wilson did commit the crimes as I allege.

I have a copy of the recording of the Tribunal hearing TNL-67103 where Don Wilson denies having
ever seen or signed the May 6 2005 and April 13 2005 agreements which are addendums to my
purchase agreement for shares in Bio Safe.

You will note the signatures on these two agreements are quite similar but not the signature he
normally uses as on my purchase agreement, Midge’s share certificate and of course his fabricated
dispute which he filed with the ORHT.

You will note that his first name “Don” appears to be the same on all the documents with a very large
“D”
but on the agreements which he had denied ever seeing or signing his last name is just a scribble and
his true signature is quite legibly “Wilson” as per his dispute.

In Lawyer File # 2 you will see Dave Grech’s response to me dated September 6 2005 ( pages 4 and 5)
which is completely incoherent to the evidence which he bases his decision not to commence or cause
to commence proceedings against Don Wilson.

You can tell he is obviously confused but he refused to respond to my many attempts to make him
aware of the facts.

Thank you,
Frank Gallagher

5
December 31 2007
Mary Elizabeth Dawson
Commissioner Conflict
of Interest and Ethics

Re: Complaint against


RCMP Commissioner
William Elliot

6
While we rely on our alliances with private sector businesses the Canadian public expects us to
ensure that public funds are spent efficiently in the public’s best interest.

RCMP ethical standards are based on 6 core values: Integrity, honesty, professionalism,
compassion, respect and accountability.

Common sense in judgment and values at the core of behavior and held accountable.

public funds are spent efficiently in the public’s best interest.

Government corruption and conspiracy would be priority number one in this category.

All the time and money wasted covering up the issues of obvious government conspiracy beginning
with the ORHT and continuity throughout the government and York Regional Police and OPP
Anti-Rackets is far from the public’s best interest and in fact completely adverse being in the best
interests of the conspirators and the fact the evidence irrefutably proves the government doesn’t
give a damn about the individual’s guaranteed Charter rights which is not only evidenced on my
web site but the extreme difference in government wages and benefits compared to the private
sector’s is a major concern relative to the publics best interests especially since the private sector
works harder and longer for less.

Approximately 2 months ago there was a report on television revealing these statistics which are
obvious anyway but I am quite sure that was taken off the air due to government interference.
I scanned news after news for a couple days after but I could not find it.

The government waste a lot of time and money covering up things and creating new Commissions
for this and that purportedly to deal with the issues as they advertise them but when you attempt to
use them they are without jurisdiction, authority, competency, responsibility, fortitude and
conviction and absolutely none of the RCMP 6 core values: Integrity, honesty, professionalism,
compassion, respect and accountability.

I am not referring to the hired help of course but those people who are in responsible positions, who
don’t understand the meaning of the word relative to the people’s best interests whereas the most
important possession one has is his or her guaranteed Charter rights of equal protection and benefits
before and under the law.

My evidence was collected during normal course of existence where I had the unfortunate
experience of necessity dealing with issues which needed the help of the government services only
to find out their ineptness to do that which is required of them in a sane manner dealing with the
immoral.of society.

They have proven to be quite competent in keeping me from the justice expected of a competent
system which has guaranteed equality to every individual in protection and benefit in all matters
before and under the law and have proven irrefutably the system is designed to rob the moral
majority and cover each others back all done under the cover of darkness, cloak of secrecy which
will not go unnoticed, when I get this evidence to the general public very soon in the New Year.

Maintaining the trust the people have placed in you does not mean cover up everything so it does
not get to the public which you clearly do not comprehend or I should say being in on the
conspiracy you do most emphatically understand as the evidence shows and both of these two
scenarios results in the same thing not in the best interest of the public..

7
Conflict of Interest

The evidence shows all you people of the government personnel I have provided the evidence to are
in conflict of interest of the individual’s guaranteed Charter rights which the Federal Government
granted by the enactment of the Constitution Act, 1982 which I have also provided to the
Commissioner of Conflict of Interest and Ethics Mary Elizabeth Dawson who was appointed under
the Federal Accountability Act, 2006

I find it incomprehensible that Mary does not consider Government Corruption and Conspiracy
unethical and in Conflict of Interest relative to the law and the individual’s guaranteed Charter
rights.

Once you get the gist of it all it is quite apparent that Government Corruption and Conspiracy is the
norm and expected of their personnel and Mary’s job is to diffuse the complaints.
In fact the whole system is designed to wear complainers out and I would imagine the majority give
up realizing they are seemingly impenetrable.

The whole system begins to backfire under persistent determination to get the justice demanded by
law as you are all aware as the evidence irrefutably shows.
The evidence long ago warranted a PUBLIC INQUIRY but loyalty remained to themselves, their
careers and above all their pensions, which demanded their loyalty to the conspiracy.

They are all well educated and experienced and know full well the issues I have raised are very
serious in nature being humongously detrimental to the people’s best interests and their guaranteed
Charter rights.

I do not expect any one of you to be capable of handling the issues yourself but I do expect you to
bring them forward to a PUBLIC INQUIRY which is the only viable approach due the
circumstances.

By not doing so and keeping it under wraps you are aiding and abetting the conspirators in direct
defiance of the law detrimental to the individual of the moral majority and society as a whole for
financial benefit. You all know full well that the evidence warrants looking into and you have
consulted with others and get your final advice from the ring leaders of the conspiracy or their
cohorts, which you feel relieves you of any liability or responsibility but who in their right mind
would accept such absurdity being advised by the alleged conspirators.

Oh I am sure you see that as sane in your world but out here in the real world it is absolutely insane
and this is the world where you will be tried in and there will be significant punishment to introduce
moral sanity to the government.

Their has not been one iota of interest from any one of you to run with these most serious issues
and you all know full well that the responsibility comes down to each and everyone of you in turn
whereas you know everyone else has refused to accept their responsibility.

Each one of you down the line of command had the power of authority of the law as your superiors
failed to accept their responsibilities being inconsistent to the support of the guarantee vital to the
well being and safety of the Canadian people being criminal denouncing their authority making
each one of you in turn legitimately in command and therefore responsible and will be held
accountable. Think hard because opportunity is running out. I am sure you know it.

8
ATTENTION

Mary Elizabeth Dawson Commissioner of Conflict of Interest and Ethics

If you have been attentive and coherent to the aforesaid and the documents I have been
e-mailing your office to no avail I now draw your attention to RCMP Commissioner William Elliot.

On November 8 2007 I filed a complaint with the Commission for Public Complaints Against the
RCMP against two members of the RCMP for refusing to investigate government corruption and
conspiracy, evidence published on my web sites which I have provided as it surfaced to the RCMP
since January 2006.

I highly suspect the decision not to investigate came from the upper command and quite probably
Commissioner Elliot has been apprised of it.

On the same day November 8 2007 the Commission mailed the complaint to the Commissioner and
mailed me a copy along with a cover page. (Copy attached)

I received acknowledgment of receipt from the RCMP Professional Standards Unit dated December
16 2007.

This is done under the auspices of the RCMP Act and according to the November 8 2007 letter from
the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP he is required to provide me with a status
report every 30 days thereafter.
That means I should have received his first status report on December 16 2007 and with today being
December 31 2007 and not received it William Elliot is obvious in non compliance of the RCMP Act.

I have no doubt William Elliot, Stockwell Day, Robert Nicholson and Prime Minister Stephen Harper
have somewhat of a quandary on their hands.

Harper, Nicholson and Day would be reluctant to let Elliot go ahead and investigate them for their
significant roles in the conspiracy and Elliot knows where his bread comes from and with the
evidence not being trivia, frivolous or vexatious and most convincing of the government corruption
being published on my web site waiting for his response they do have a full plate to get out of this
one.
Oh, I have full confidence in them and they will orchestrate a plan which is their forte but every step
of the way will be closely scrutinized wouldn’t you think.

I mean here we have it all front and centre for them to show us what they got implicating everyone
involved along the way.

Anyway I don’t believe in giving immorality an over extended fair chance to recoup although I am
keen on providing enough rope.

It’s now time to reel them in or at least put some reasonable pressure on them.
This document of course will be published on my web site by the time you read this in an effort to
alleviate me of some pressure and at least point the finger in case of any foreseeable occurrence.

Yes the nature of this is very serious and I suggest you start dealing with it in the manner it deserves.

9
I would say this is a matter of the well being and public safety of an individual I have come to know.

I reiterate RCMP Commissioner William Elliot is in non compliance with the RCMP Act rather minor in the
whole scheme of things but it is a place to commence to blow the whole thing wide open wouldn’t you think?

I request you to investigate the RCMP Commissioner William Elliot for Conflict of Interest namely for not
acting in the best interest of the people by performing his duty in a manner consistent with the Constitution
conducive to the individual’s guaranteed Charter rights of equality in protection and benefits in all matters
before and under the law whereas he is responsible to investigate the complaint against the two members of the
RCMP for refusing to investigate the government corruption and conspiracy and the only way to determine if
they had a right to refuse the evidence as invalid is to study it and if he is competent, responsible and
irreproachable as required to be able to support the guarantee of the Charter equally to every individual he
must find the evidence is far beyond any reasonable doubt of the government corruption and conspiracy which
he will have no legitimate reason to not find his RCMP members guilty as charged but then they have
obviously acted upon the authority of upper command which could probably have been him which just goes
round and round and out to Stockwell Day who is William Elliot’s superior and the evidence clearly shows his
efforts at diverting the issues and so on like that.

You know very well what I mean and you know where it’s all headed and this is your opportunity to just do
your job and distance yourself from the conspirators.

Once again I remind you of the absurdity to state you consulted with the alleged conspirators and were advised
not to proceed.

Each person is responsible for their own destiny which is readily understood but you people have a very
special responsibility for the well being and safety of the people who finance you and upon acceptance of
benefit for that purpose the contract is binding. Live up to it or live down to it.

Ultimately we are back to your responsibility to yourself. Round and round where it stops everybody knows.
Of course, with yourself.

I have attached document “Commission RCMP Complaints Dec. 27 2007” published on my web site which
contains the pertinent evidence. The November 8 letter from the Commission for Public Complaints Against
the RCMP and the November 16 2007 from the Professional Standards Unit.

I have also attached document “This column was published………Sept 13 2000” which is relevant.
All the evidence on my web site is relevant as to the conspiracy and RCMP Commissioner William Elliot is
aware and required to be coherent to it in addressing his complaint and it is relevant as to why he has not
provided me the 30 day status report.

I expect you to deal with this matter FFF Forthright, Forthcoming and Forthwith in case you have forgotten.

Should you be of the opinion that this matter has nothing to do with your jurisdiction I will expect a full
explanation as to why not and a copy of the letter you forward the matter to who will ultimately end up
holding the bag unless that person notifies me as to whom they passed the buck to.

Do you see what I mean?

I remind you the games are over, it’s been fun, schools out, grab a slice of reality.
A responsible person in you position would not just shrug off a conspiracy stating it has nothing to do with
you, because you are informed and it is far more than a moral responsibility.

You have my web address should you care to review the evidence and I highly recommend you show an
initiative to actually deal with that which is in the publics best interest and of course let us not forget your own.
Frank Gallagher
PS I have forwarded copy to Federal Ombudsman Victim of Crimes Re: Commissioner RCMP
10
Formal Charges of Conflict of Interest

June 6 2008

To: Mary Elizabeth Dawson


Commissioner
Conflict of Interest
Frank Gallagher
Re: Charges of Conflict of Interest against
34 Riverglen Drive
Keswick, On
Federal Government and Personnel
L4P 2P8
The Parliament of Canada
905-476-8959
franklyone@hotmail.com
Prime Minister Stephen Harper www.cdf.name
frank@cdf.name
Office of the Prime Minister
M. Bredeson
Executive Correspondence Officer
for the Prime Minister's Office

Office of the Minister of Justice and


Attorney General of Canada
J. Brisebois
Manager
Ministerial Correspondence Unit

Minister of Justice and


Attorney General of Canada Evidence published or referenced on the following links
Robert Nicholson http://groups.google.com/group/charter-democracy-force
http://groups.google.com/group/the-cdf-documents
Former Minister of Justice www.cdf.name
Vic Toews

Minister of Public Safety


Stockwell Day

Dear Commissioner Mary Elizabeth Dawson

I have provided you a series of e-mails requesting you investigate the Federal Government personnel listed
above for Conflict of Interest

I have both e-mailed evidence to you and provided you with the original web site address of the
Charter Democracy Force http://groups.google.com/group/charter-democracy-force, the new web site address of
the Charter Democracy Force www.cdf.name and the CDF Documents web site, where the irrefutable evidence
is published and or referenced, but you have not yet informed me as to the status of your investigation.

I request once again that you investigate the Federal Government personnel listed above for Conflict of Interest

All of the accused have been provided the aforementioned evidence and the web site addresses

As you are aware the RCMP Commissioner has been charged with the responsibility to study the evidence on
the sites under the RCMP Act due me filing with the Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP on
November 8 2007 for refusing to investigate government organized crime of corruption and conspiracy.

On April 21 2008 I was informed I would be receiving the RCMP Final Letter of Disposition within 30 days but
due to circumstances RCMP Staff Sergeant R.B. MacAdam who had been assigned to the case informed me by
Interim Report May 20 2008 that it would be delayed by a few days which I am still waiting for.

This Final Letter of Disposition will be posted on the web sites and I will notify you when it comes providing the
path to it.

11
I expect it will decline an investigation because the evidence shows the RCMP Commissioner is involved with
the conspiracy and I offer you that so you you don’t use their decision to get you off the hook of investing the
above personnel for Conflict of Interest

The evidence shows the Government Office’s were corrupted prior to the political Ministers being appointed and
they have just carried on as per tradition..

There is a prodigious amount of evidence published on the various web sites to read which is all relevant but I
draw your attention to the following.

Constitution Act, 1982


Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

The major concern is the Federal Government has failed to demonstrate due diligence to the structuring of the
legal system consistence with the Constitution conducive to the support of the individual’s guaranteed Charter
rights but have convincingly demonstrated the system is designed for the profiteering of the members of the Law
Societies where victims who became victims due to their negligence to put a competent system in place capable
of supporting every individuals equal rights of protection and benefits before and under the law are further
victimized by the members of the law societies who charge extravagant rates to support their luxurious lifestyles.

This is contrary to the Charter being discriminatory in many ways.

15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal
protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without
discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or
physical disability.

The taxpayer pays for the defence of the majority of the criminal element who due their nature are not likely to
pay their fair share of taxes and are often not very well off financially which is inherent to the system as they are
entitled to lawyers provided by the government whereas the taxpayer generally has to pay for his or her own
legal counsel.

In such a system the wealthy have a humongous advantage over the not so well off and the big corporate
conglomerates weighing everything in dollar and cents have many lawyers as they plan their modus operandi
based on the likelihood of an individual challenging them in court being limited in funds and due the
incompetence of the system weighted in the corporations favour generally are never challenged being too costly
and just too damn much trouble to go through the legal system to be recompensed.

This is a phenomenon not limited to corporations because it is just simply too much trouble to go after someone
for a $50 bad cheque for example which encourages such illegal actions, which I have offered as evidence
relative to the criminally fraudulent actions perpetrated against me.
On pages 13 and 14 of Lawyer File # 11 published on the the CDF Documents web site
http://groups.google.com/group/the-cdf-documents is a letter from Rod Bradbury of EcoSafe who I
had asked if he was the Vice-President of BioSafe which the president sold me shares providing a
prospectus shown on page 12 of Lawyer File # 11.
He responded that he never was and he had written off around $1000 that he was still owed as a
business experience.

The significance of this is the criminal element are aware of this weakness in the system and they
flourish creating a humongous number of victims who go unrecorded in the statistics compromising the
individuals guaranteed rights of protection.

12
Then when this same person commits fraud over $100,000 at the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal part
of the Ontario legal system, financed by the taxpayer to administer and enforce law consistent with the
Constitution, witnessed and recorded by the judicator the ORHT refuse to file charges in this matter
and another of filing false and misleading information an offense under section 206(2) of the Tenant
Protection Act, 1997.

This is absurd allowing such occurrences clearly demonstrating they have no interest in supporting the
individual’s guaranteed Charter rights of protection where punishment is the first line of defence
attentive to deterrence where justice is difficult to be recompensed if at all after becoming victamized.

I reiterate the system is designed for the profit of the members of the Law Societies applying no
deterrence allowing the immoral to flourish providing the lawyers a luxurious lifestyle attending to the
symptoms rather than nipping criminal inclination in the bud.

It is absolutely incomprehensible that when they have the criminal dead to rights committed right in the
court they let him go where most often is the case it is difficult to catch them and they have committed
many crimes before they are caught leaving many victims in their wake.

As pathetic as they are it is absurd that they would go to so much trouble fighting me off trying to get
the justice due me in accordance with the Constitution in support of the rights of protection of every
individual provided by the Charter.

Now if that is not bad enough they tampered with the recording removing pertinent evidence and on the
second day of the hearing the judicator announced they would not be recording it.

From there it just continues into absurdity more detailed in the Mad Glad mostly Sad…Why?
document http://the-cdf-documents.googlegroups.com/web/MadGladmostlySadWHY.doc?
gda=3fuJCUgAAABCWQx_x0HpiLdNaqsVlqbHjksKO9lujfWPc5HrAQObnmG1qiJ7UbTIup-
M2XPURDQPvPFo8HVLzg_iwmWsfX3d08Nh64l7DRKSFWPLQnu7OA published on the same
web site.

The entire Ontario Government obstructed justice and aided and abetted the criminal.
The evidence irrefutably proves the Ontario Government refuse to support the individual’s guaranteed
Charter rights which is the responsibility of the Ontario Attorney General as stated in the “Roles and
Responsibilities of the Attorney General” as published on the Ontario web site.
http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/ag/agrole.asp

It clearly states he is the Guardian of the Public Interest and also the Guardian of the rule of law,
which brings us to another serious matter.

The very first line of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states
Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law

The “Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General” defines it as that most elusive concept, a well
established legal principle, hard to easily define that protects the individual and society as a whole..

Obviously not competent to protect the individual’s guaranteed Charter rights but is conducive to the
luxurious money making ploy of the members of the Law Societies.

13
Notably there is no entry in the “Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General” of the Charter
convincingly suggesting they never intended to support the individual’s guaranteed Charter rights
although they would never admit it but inadvertently have done so persistently throughout all the
evidence published on the web.

************************************************************************
That brings us to the federal government where it is the responsibility of the Minister of Justice and
Attorney General of Canada as the government chief legal advisor to advise all the government
departments and agencies.

This is stated in the DOJ letter dated January 22 2007 published on the Charter Democracy Force site
http://groups.google.com/group/charter-democracy-force on page 23 of the Government Correspondence
compiled September 1 2007

http://charter-democracy-force.googlegroups.com/web/GovernmentCorrespondencecompiledSept12007.doc

J. Brisebois goes on to state the Parliament of Canada is responsible for enacting federal law while
administering those laws is a federal responsibility.

So obviously it is the responsibility of the Ontario Attorney General to administer those laws which is confirmed
in the “Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General”

So whose responsibility is it to see that the Attorney General lives up to his responsibilities?

The aforementioned link to the Government Correspondence clearly shows the Premier Dalton McGuinty and
my MPP Julia Munro do not consider it theirs.

Ultimately it is the responsibility of the federal government who made the guarantee who purportedly never made
any arrangements to assure the provinces supported it.

This suggests once again they never intended to support the Charter guarantee to every individual.

So either they are required to support the guarantee they made under common law or they have deliberately
intended to misrepresent the fact that the people had guaranteed Charter rights while in fact they do not as they
do not as they obviously do not enforce it.

All the evidence shows they never intended to support the individual’s guaranteed Charter rights and yet they
are forever making comments on our Charter rights.

What was the point of guaranteeing all the rights if they never intended to back them”

Well, does not matter because the Constitution is the supreme law of Canada and they are obliged to abide by it
and enforce it.

32. (1) This Charter applies (a) to the Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all
matters within the authority of Parliament including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and
Northwest Territories; and (b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect
of all matters within the authority of the legislature of each province.

To be responsible the Attorney Generals must be competent responsible irreproachable with fortitude and
conviction to the support of the individual’s guaranteed Charter rights which obviously they are not as irrefutably
proven in the published documents.

What they are though is unscrupulous deceptive prevaricators which is consistently proven throughout the
documents.

14
Thiey are members of the Law Society of Upper Canada who have adamantly stated or implied their members
are not required to give a damn about the individual’s guaranteed Charter rights in the 2 Part Law Society of
Upper Canada document.

http://charter-democracy-force.googlegroups.com/web/Part1LawSocietyofUpperCanada.doc

http://charter-democracy-force.googlegroups.com/web/Part2LawSocietyofUpperCanada.doc

The Law Society also claim their members are not required to validate their clients charges against the alleged
before commencing proceedings which caused me undue hardship and frustration illegally putting me in a
position where I would require a lawyer to defend my position which of course I decided not to do given the
possibility of receiving justice as the evidence shows is impossible where members of the Law Society hold
every position of authority in the legal system and why the majority of people just write it off as a lost cause.

Then the Society goes on to state they are not required to look at the supporting evidence of a complaint I filed
against one of their members as obviously the decision is made he is innocent before the complaint is filed.

This consistency is obvious throughout the prodigious number of documents published on the web sites.

There is much more to say about the Ontario Government but that is not in your jurisdiction but it is available for
you to read to see what happens when the federal government refuses to back the guarantee they made to
every Canadian individual.

The Accountability Act, 2006

Where common sense prevails a guarantee or law not enforced is not guaranteed or law if the personals
responsible are not held accountable and made responsible.

Obviously the provisions to every individual as guaranteed by the Charter require competent responsible
irreproachable government personnel with fortitude and conviction to the endeavour and the Minister of Justice
and Attorney General of Canada is required to be responsible for federal constitutional matters and the Ontario
Attorney General is responsible fro the province of Ontario constitutional matters clearly stated in the “Roles and
Responsibilities of the Attorney General” and the aforementioned letter from the DOJ dated January 22 2007.

So why would we need the Accountability Act, 2006 enacted by Prime Minister Stephen
Harper with the aid of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada?

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and former Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Vic Toews were both provided the evidence prior to the enactment of the Accountability Act and could have had
some influence as to why it was enacted.

There are at least two ways of reasoning why it was enacted.

1) An attempt to cover up the incompetent irresponsible reproachable DOJ, Minister of Justice and
Attorney General of Canada who advises all the government departments and agencies and responsible
for ineptness of the federal legal system to support the individual’s guaranteed Charter rights.
2) They never intended to back the individual’s guaranteed Charter rights

Either one would be difficult to explain to the people.

The book by British Columbia history professor Jonathan Swainger makes reference to a book by Edmund
Morgan who asserts the success of any form of government is dependent on their ability to deceive the people
and in a democracy it is necessary for the people to believe they have a voice and the representatives are the
people for the people..

15
http://books.google.com/books?
id=eRHTr2TCBMwC&pg=PA19&dq=roles+and+responsibilities+of+the+attorney+general+canada&sig=hi6yCnn
xTgLu6Qjx9yJS2U80xG4#PPA19,M1

It also mentions something about not being caught or the government would collapse, no different than any
syndicated organized crime where it is forever necessary to deceive the people for continued success.

Their can be no doubt this is a premeditated government internal problem that an individual could not possible
taken on by oneself which of course is the reason for its success and yet invariably they tell me with tongue in
cheek that I should get a lawyer and I could argue it out until I went bankrupt or the government did.

So do we have guaranteed Charter rights or not?


Yes and no

The Constitution: Document is the supreme law of Canada signed by the authorities in power at
the time even though they were obviously unscrupulous as the “Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney
General” attests as it defines that most elusive concept –the rule of law- a well established legal principle, hard
to easily define that protects the individual and society as a whole.

The people are guaranteed their Charter rights no matter what they intended because it is hardly likely they are
going to come forward and say it was all just a big joke, so yes we are legitimately guaranteed Charter rights.

But no, at present we do not have guaranteed Charter rights by the governments’ refusal to support them.

They got a lot of splainin to do and a PUBLIC INQUIRY is the only viable option..

The rule of law is not competent to support a democratic form of government let alone a charter democracy and
they knew it when they entered it into the Charter being at the least criminally fraudulent.

Democracy
Social equality, equality, egalitarianism

Egalitarianism
Parity, fairness, equal opportunity, impartiality

Justice
Fairness, impartiality, righteousness, even-handedness, fair dealing, honesty, integrity

It is the incompetence of the rule of law that deprives society of justice, the tax payers an exorbitant amount to
fund the system and the great rip offs by the lawyers who are provided free to the criminal element who can not
afford one which in itself is not constitutional with the innocent tax payer having to provide for his or her own
lawyer who get into inane long debates due the incompetence of the system which severely compromises the
individuals guaranteed Charter rights and equal benefits.

A farly recent study within the past year showed govement personnel were far better paid with much better
benefits than the people in the private sector who not only contributed to their benefits, but can not afford to
provide them for themselves.

Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day proved his involvement in the conspiracy very well where a copy of his e-
mail to me is enclosed in the Stockwell Day November 3 2007 document.
http://charter-democracy-force.googlegroups.com/web/StockwellDayNovember3.doc

16
He demonstrated how they deal with serious issues when the DOJ is linked to a crime as in the RCMP Pension
fund scandal.

When evidence linked the DOJ to the pension fund scandal and a Public Inquiry was warranted Stockwell
intervened stating it would just waste a lot of taxpayers’s money and a Task Force was the way to go.

When the Task Force Report came in their was no mention of the DOJ.

Imagine that!!!!

What can you expect of professionally trained charlatans of deception and prevarication, which is prominent
throughout the evidence?

You have been provided a prodigious amount of evidence which irrefutably proves the government is organized
crime personified of corruption and conspiracy against the individual’s of the Lower Tier which in itself is not
constitutional.

Do your job and make things right.

Public Inquiry demanded.

Frank Gallagher

PS

Please acknowledge immediately your intention to review the evidence or not.

One more thing. See page 9


Yesterday I was watching CPAC which provides a great example of the incompetence and injustice of the
government

17
June 5 2008

Today at about 9 AM I was watching a rerun of the May 27 2008 Committee on Aboriginal funding per
child being significantly different from that which is allotted for the provinces children.

The Auditor General could not comment as a matter of policy and the Senators did not have a clue as to
how to deal with this most serious matter being indicative of that which the evidence irrefutably proves
on the Charter Democracy Force web site www.cdf.name.

This is clearly an issue of the incompetence of the government to support every individual’s guaranteed
Charter rights of equality of protection and benefits where there is not a competent responsible
irreproachable system of fortitude and conviction to the support of the provisions of the Charter
guarantee to every individual.

Obviously these people are of the Lower Tier as I and the majority of the populace and due the
deliberate incompetence of the DOJ to structure a system consistent with the Constitution conducive to
the support of every individual these people have been deliberately neglected in so many ways to a
disgraceful level of impoverishment giving them no alternative but to seek other avenues to escape the
hopeless and despair in an effort to find a better way of life adding to the burden upon society and the
safety and wellbeing of every individual is compromised as is the case where ever such atrocities are
allowed to prevail.

They turn to alcohol and drugs nourishing the drug trade and obviously the money has to come from
some where of a nefarious nature, not only compromising the safety and wellbeing of the moral
majority but increase the burden on taxpayers providing their defence and the necessity of funding the
legal system to deal with them where the money would be well spent dealing with the situation head on
at the root of the problem preventing the predictable saving victims from undo hardships rather than
providing one more avenue for the members of the Law Society to feast off.

This is a disgrace and just further evidence of the irresponsible government personnel who are
deliberately made so feeling they are obliged to follow customs and policies set out by the federal
government, where they are designed to obstruct the support of the individual’s guaranteed Charter
rights where the support should be Forthright Forthcoming and Forthwith to the support.

This as well as the issues addressed on the www.cdf.name site and others referenced thereon
consistently prove the deliberate incompetence and refusal of the federal government to back the
guarantee they made to every individual equally with the enactment of the Constitution in 1982 where
every initiative is intent on covering up their conspiracy that they never intended to support the
individual’s guaranteed Charter rights in the first place being immediately apparent in the first line of
the Charter

“Whereas Canada is founded on principles that recognizes the supremacy of God and the rule of law”

Whereas the “Roles and Responsibilities of the Attorney General” published on the Ontario web site
defines:
That most elusive concept – the rule of law- a well established legal principle, hard to easily define
being the rule of law that protects the individual and society as a whole.

18
The rule of law is obviously impossible to protect the people as guaranteed or as either stated or
implied by the definition of the word democracy, which they adamantly proclaim to be the form of
government they administer and enforce in Canada.

A Public Inquiry is warranted on the aboriginal issues and those previously presented where a “Final
Letter of Disposition” from the RCMP Commissioner is presently due as to the validity of the evidence
and quite probably has been delayed as they attempt to orchestrate their way out as is their forte
embedded in their M.O.

Frank Gallagher

19
_____________________________________________
From: Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner/Commissariat aux conflits d'intérêts et à
l'éthique [mailto:CIEC-CCIE@parl.gc.ca]
Sent: June 4, 2008 8:23 AM
To: Frank Gallagher
Subject: Read: Efforts to understanding

Your message

To: info@flsc.ca; jherman@flsc.ca; fwilson@flsc.ca;


kwillfed@aol.com; pierre.leduc@rcmp-grc.gc.ca;
attorneygeneral@jus.gov.on.ca; garth@garth.ca; LeBlanc, Dominic -
député; webmaster@rcmp-grc.gc.ca; roy.steinebach@rcmp-grc.gc.ca;
brian.verheul@rcmp-grc.gc.ca; Primetimecrime@gmail.com;
webadmin@greenparty.ca; info@cba.org; mail@cba-alberta.org;
edmonton@cba-alberta.org; cba@bccba.org; admin@cbanb.com;
cba-nl@nl.rogers.com; cbanwt@lawsociety.nt.ca; cbans@ns.sympatico.ca;
info@oba.org; cba-pei@isn.net; cba.sk@sasktel.net;
cbayukon@internorth.com; Conflict of Interest and Ethics
Commissioner/Commissariat aux conflits d'intérêts et à l'éthique;
ndpaoatlantic@ns.aliantzinc.ca; information@forces.gc.ca;
ndpao-pacific@shaw.ca; ndpaocal@nucleus.com; NDPAO@bellnet.ca;
ndpao.mtl@videotron.ca; webmaster@forces.gc.ca; AdamsoV@erc-cee.gc.ca;
adavidov@torontohabitat.on.ca; aleadbea@infocom.gc.ca; Ambrose, Rona -
M.P.; ahorwath-qp@ndp.on.ca; ayala_disadvantage@hotmail.com;
admin@otla.com; Atkins, Norman; Angus, David; Bernier, Maxime - Député;
Baird, John - M.P.; bbalkissoon.mpp@liberal.ola.org;
bduguid.mpp@liberal.ola.org; Blackburn, Jean-Pierre - Député; Bacon,
Lise; Biron, Michel; Baker, George; bob.runciman@pc.ola.org;
bill.murdoch@pc.ola.org; bergeron_hater_1976@hotmail.com; Bellehumeur,
Gisèle; complaints@cpc-cpp.gc.ca; Clement, Tony - M.P.; Cannon, Lawrence
- Député; cdicocco.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; bentley.mpp@liberal.ola.org;
Poilievre, Pierre - M.P.; robin.roberts@cpc-cpp.gc.ca; Ritz, Gerry -
M.P.; rbartolucci.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; randy.craig@jus.gov.on.ca;
Rompkey, William; Ringuette, Pierrette; Russell, Marie; Rokosh, Gillian;
Ratte, Lise; sandra.conlin@rcmp-grc.gc.ca; Skelton, Carol - M.P.;
spupatello.mpp@liberal.ola.org; speters.mpp@liberal.ola.org; Strahl,
Chuck - M.P.; Solberg, Monte - M.P.; Smith, David; Smith, Carol;
Sibbeston, Nick; Spivak, Mira; St. Germain, Gerry; Stollery, Peter;
Stratton, Terrance R.; szwebmaster@yahoo.com; support@besthotfilms.com;
Symantec@reply.digitalriver.com; swainger@unbc.ca; Sweet, David - M.P.;
terryoc2001@yahoo.ca; tpulcine@privcom.gc.ca; Toews, Vic - M.P.;
Thompson, Greg - M.P.; Tardif, Claudette; Tkachuk, David;
victimsfirst@ombudsman.gc.ca; Verner, Josée - Députée;
vdhillon.mpp@liberal.ola.org; Van Loan, Peter - Riding 1; Van Loan,
Peter - Assistant 1; webadmin@justice.gc.ca;
warthurs.mpp@liberal.ola.org; Watt, Charlie; whistleblower@ctv.ca;
web@ps.gc.ca; willis@forces.gc.ca; Williams, John - M.P.; Wrzesnewskyj,
Borys - M.P.; Zimmer, Rod; philreporter1989@yahoo.ca;
editor@philreporter.com; sandra.conlin@rcmp-grc.gc.ca;
licia.corbella@calgarysun.com; info@vivelecanada.ca;
nphlstatistician@hotmail.com; press@transparency.org;
ti-can@transparency.ca; askgov@worldbank.org; sprayriver@yahoo.ca;
newsroom@globeandmail.com; news@citynews.ca; newsdesk@metronews.ca;
admin@georginaadvocate.com; admin@stouffvillesun.com;
keithbainmla@ns.sympatico.ca; bakermg@gov.ns.ca; barnetbe@gov.ns.ca;
mlashelburne@eastlink.ca; bolivargetson@eastlink.ca; educmin@gov.ns.ca;
min_dfa@gov.ns.ca; justmin@gov.ns.ca; mlaclarke@ns.sympatico.ca;
colwelkw@gov.ns.ca; vconrad@ns.aliantzinc.ca; healmin@gov.ns.ca;

20
ddexter@ns.sympatico.ca; dooksbf@gov.ns.ca; patdunnmla@ns.aliantzinc.ca;
hepstein@ns.aliantzinc.ca; billestabrooks@navnet.net;
elf@ns.sympatico.ca; gaudetw@gov.ns.ca; glavinla@gov.ns.ca
Subject: Efforts to understanding
Sent: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 16:41:47 -0400

was read on Wed, 4 Jun 2008 08:22:52 -0400

No response to date October 5 2008

21