Canadian Governance Reform Council

914 950 Drake Avenue

Vancouver, British Columbia,
Canada V6Z 2B9
Ph. 604.609.0520
http://cgrc.yolasite.com
bradkempoesq@gmail.com

July 30, 2015

Attorney General of British Columbia

PO Box 9290 Stn Prov Govt
Victoria BC V8W 9J7

Attention: Richard Fyfe, QC, Deputy Attorney General

E-Mailed: agwebfeedback@gov.bc.ca

Dear Sir:

Re: Formal Request for Investigation About Criminality and Human Rights
Violations by agencies of the Government of Canada

I premise my entire submission with a bona fide concern I have about those
whom the above-caption accusations relate. In September 2002 I
commenced litigation in the Federal Court of Canada seeking damages for a
plethora of causes of action (File No. T-114-02). Upon filing its defence the
Government of Canada claimed, and successfully, national security privilege
(File No. DES-5-03). This procured a full review of what was originally pled;
and led to authorship of an Amended Statement of Claim.

One allegation was that the law practice I commenced in Edmonton in

October 1990 was brought to surreptitiously ruination within 2 years, four
months, by CSIS and other colluding agencies on the federal, provincial and
local levels. It would take an academic research project (B.A. Degree in
political philosophy, LL.B., see included Family Bio) to discover why I was

1
targeted for an egregious systemic abuse of power that lasted some fifteen
years before discovering it (fully described herein). In part, it stemmed
from the fact my uncle was appointed to the Senate in 1975, the Hon. Paul
Lucier (Yukon, 1975; deceased) and my mother became one of the first
judges on the 1984-created Tax Court of Canada (see Family Bio). Both
were, as far as the establishment was concerned, outsiders and it would
take the loss of my practice and sabotage of two entrepreneurial ventures to
reasonably infer Id been subject to a form of career peripheralization that is
antithetical to democratic practices and protocols. It was, from one
perspective, a direct attack on the independence of the Bar; and from
another an intentional and malicious deprivation of potential upward mobility
opportunities because of my family pedigree.

After prosecuting my lawsuit for a year and a half I commenced the

research.1 Thereafter what corroborated my preliminary findings occurred.
In early August 2004 I was visited by two members of the Vancouver Police
Department alleging Id been stalking a local television personality; and had
a plethora of emails to prove the charge. They were, incontestably,
fabricated. What was even more shocking was advising they were instructed
to escort me to a local psychiatric facility and have me involuntarily
committed pursuant to provincial mental health legislation. Upon drawing
to their attention the lawsuit and research they concluded Id been set up
and departed.

This attempt at intimidation and coercion only fueled my determination viz.

the litigation and research. During December and January 05 I
disseminated my findings to parliamentarians, law societies and other

1
By then it was inferred the Court was heavily biased in favour of the Defendant;
and I wanted to learn what the conditions and antecedents were viz. the alleged
abuses of power since 1987 that would lead to what was pled.
2
interested parties. During early February I was again confronted with psych
ward incarceration on fabricated evidence and held for just over a month.
Pharmaceuticals were used extensively during the first week and then
doubled the second.

In the article Political Abuse of Psychiatry in the Soviet Union and in China:
Complexities and Controversies, by Richard J. Bonnie, LLB (Journal of the
American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 30:13644, 2002)2, he
conducts case studies of the former Soviet Union and China.3 He states in
his introduction:

On first glance, political abuse of psychiatry appears to represent a

straightforward and uncomplicated story: the deployment of medicine as
an instrument of repression. Psychiatric incarceration of mentally healthy
people is uniformly understood to be a particularly pernicious form of
repression, because it uses the powerful modalities of medicine as tools
of punishment, and it compounds a deep affront to human rights with
deception and fraud. Doctors who allow themselves to be used in this
way (certainly as collaborators) betray the trust of society and breach
their most basic ethical obligations as professionals. When the story is so
straightforward, political abuse of psychiatry is universally condemned.
Even regimes that sponsor psychiatric repression find it morally
embarrassing to admit that they engage in such a corrupt practice. When
the Soviet Union was defending its suppression of political and religious
dissent, it steadfastly denied allegations of psychiatric repression
allegations that have now been well documented and are no longer
contested by the psychiatric leadership in Russia and other post-Soviet
states.

In a 2007 article (34 Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce,

405), the authors summary of her thesis includes the following:

It is the contention of this paper that forced psychiatric interventions

violate the universal prohibition of torture. [...] [T]here is a need to
examine the serious nature and consequences of forced psychiatric
interventions as a violent assault, in most cases sanctioned if not

2
Source: http://www.jaapl.org/content/30/1/136.full.pdf
3
The relevance of China to this circumstance is described in Chapter 3 herein.
3
 perpetrated by the state, affecting every aspect of a person's life: the
body, the mind, the personality, the social relationships, and the spiritual
values or higher meaning.

That wasnt the end of it. In May 2006, I entered into an agreement with
the Bush administration to help with reform of whats become so blatantly
dysfunctional in this countrys system of governance.

The first instance of similar punitive retaliation was mid-June 2007. Again
evidence was manufactured to justify a psychiatric intervention. However,
when being examined by the intake doctor, he concluded there were no legal
grounds for holding me.

Because this approach was not efficacious in causing me to stand down the
launch of reform initiatives4 and my American collaboration my family was
targeted. In early January 2007, my sister, Dr. Roma Kempo M.D., was
manipulated into a circumstance and then evidence was fabricated that led
to her psych ward incarceration for almost a month (Coquitlam hospital). It
occurred again in early October 2009 (Hope hospital) and a third time in
January 2011 (Seachelt hospital).

Human Rights Watch, in World Report 2015: China,5 writes: The

government targets activists and their family members for harassment,
arbitrary detention, legally baseless imprisonment and torture.6

The purpose of the foregoing is to alert you to the real possibility that either
psych ward incarceration based on manufactured evidence or a criminal

4
They include whats posted at http://reformcoalitionofcanada.yolasite.com,
http://cgrc.yolasite.com and http://ccp1.yolasite.com.
5
Source: https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2015/country-chapters/china- and-
tibet
6
Again, the relevance of China will be fully apparent upon reading Chapter 1.
4
prosecution employing the same methodology may be mused to prevent me
from leaving Canada for an employment opportunity overseas.

It arose as a result of being retained to help raise US$4.5 million for a client
who wants to purchase a producing mine in the Klondike Gold Fields of the
Yukon. I assembled a website to disseminate information so that investors
could conduct comprehensive due diligence. 7

From the third week of March until June I contacted over five hundred
Australian mining companies; out of which an agent for high net worth
corporate investors became instrumental in the negotiation of whats about
to become a signed agreement. My finders fee of US$135,000 affords me
the capital necessary to travel; resources Ive never been allowed to acquire
since the abuse of power commenced in 1987.
7
http://mcpp.yolasite.com
5
This is where the threats to involuntarily incarcerate me based on more
fabricated evidence or arrest, charge and prosecute me on trump up criminal
charges is germane. Sometime in the next six weeks I will be booking my
flight and could be faced with this systemic unlawfulness again.
Consequently, Im alerting your office to this in the event the malfeasant
parties are brazen and ignorant enough to try. This notification of their
repeatedly stated intent will be relied upon to reverse any criminality and
tortious conduct they may choose to engage in. And then the Attorney
General will be able to conduct an expedited investigation to bring them to
justice.

What was the abuse of power I experienced beginning in the late 1980s and
continued throughout the 1990s and into the 2000s?

My first contact with your predecessor and his federal counterpart was in
late autumn 2007. Both were formally asked to investigate. The formers
immediate subordinate stated this on October 1, 2007:

From: AG LSB CSD Mail AG:EX (AGLSBCSDMail@gov.bc.ca)

Sent: October-01-07 4:25:07 PM
To: bkempo@hotmail.com

Dear Brad Kempo:

Your e-mail dated September 27, 2007, and attachments,

received by Allan Seckel, Deputy Attorney General, and David
Morhart, Deputy Solicitor General, have been forwarded to me
for response on their behalf.

Staff in this ministry have reviewed the materials that you have
provided and we have concluded that your allegations have no
legal merit. Therefore, we have decided not to investigate the
matters described in your correspondence. If you have reason
to believe that someone has been involved in criminal activity,
the proper course of action would be for you to report your

6
 allegations to the police. If the police determine that an
investigation is warranted, they will conduct one.

I wish to advise you that neither the Deputy Attorney General or

the Deputy Solicitor General will be responding further on this
particular matter.
Thank you for writing.
Sincerely,

Elizabeth Argall, Acting Assistant Deputy Attorney General

pc: The Honourable Gordon Campbell, David Morhart, Allan
Seckel

A review of the decision was requested of the B.C. Attorney General. His
response, dated December 3, 2007, sustained the position of his
subordinate:

From: AG WEBFEEDBACK AG: EX

(AGWEBFEEDBACK@gov.bc.ca)
Sent: December-03-07 3:29:21 PM
To: bkempo@hotmail.com

Dear Mr. Kempo:

Thank you for your e-mail dated October 12, 2007, addressed to
my Ministerial Assistant, Mr. Michael Harrison. I am responding
on his behalf. I understand that you are requesting that I put in
writing whether I support the position taken by Ms. Elizabeth
Argall, Acting Assistant Deputy Attorney General, Legal Services
Branch, in her e-mail of October 1, 2007, which responded to
your e-mail of September 27, 2007.

I note your allegations regarding the DND, the RCMP, CSIS,

municipal police forces and others with respect to an alleged
military alliance between the Government of Canada and the
Government of the Peoples Republic of China. In her October 1
e-mail, Ms. Argall explained that ministry staff have reviewed
your allegations and determined that they have no legal merit. I
have faith in that determination. Therefore, we will not be
investigating your allegations any further. As Ms. Argall also
mentioned, you should report any allegations of criminal

7
 wrongdoing to the police with jurisdiction. I trust that this letter
explains my position.
I will not be corresponding further with you regarding this
matter.
Sincerely,

Wally Oppal, Attorney General and Minister Responsible for

Multiculturalism
pc: The Honourable Gordon Campbell, The Honourable Michael
de Jong, The Honourable John Les, Mr. Michael Harrison, Mr.
David Morhart, Mr. Allan Seckel, Mr. Brian Sims

The response from the federal Attorney General was this:

From: mcu@justice.gc.ca on behalf of Ministerial

Correspondence Unit - Mailout (mcu2@justice.gc.ca)
Sent: November-05-07 12:07:33 PM
To: bkempo@hotmail.com

Dear Mr. Kempo:

On behalf of the Honourable Rob Nicholson, Minister of Justice

and Attorney General of Canada, I acknowledge receipt of your
correspondence regarding various issues. Please be assured that
your correspondence has been brought to the attention of the
Minister and examined by appropriate departmental officials.
However, I must advise you that the Minister is unable to assist
with these matters in any way. Thank you for writing.

Yours sincerely,

Maureen Murphy, Chief of Staff

This is what was in part pled in the Federal Court lawsuit:

56. In mid-March 1990, CSIS perpetuated the second stage of the

campaign when its agent, identified to the Plaintiff as Jim
approached the Plaintiff while he was employed as a Student-at-
Law at an Edmonton law firm. Jim asked the Plaintiff to and he
did attend at what appeared to him as the offices of CSIS in
Edmonton to discuss seeking his cooperation in what was stated

8
 to be a covert surveillance operation (operation) of
indeterminate length of agents of the Country of the Federation
of Russia alleged by Jim to be engaged in, inter alia, economic
espionage. CSIS appeared to install the equipment in his home
on or about April 1, 1990.

57. The Plaintiff and the Defendant entered an Agreement

(Agreement), the date of same being during or around the
third week of March 1990. Jim negotiated and executed said
agreement on behalf of the Defendant. Express and implied
terms of the agreement between the said Defendants agency
and the Plaintiff include, but are not limited to:

(i) Defendant to pay Plaintiffs monthly rent for his home

at the end of each or beginning of next month;

(ii) in the event the Plaintiffs or family members personal

health or safety or the Plaintiffs professional practice,
reputation and standing with the Law Society were put
at risk in any manner as a result of his involvement in
the operation, the Defendant would take all reasonable
steps diligently to provide necessary protection and
safety resources, including but not limited to witness
protection;
(iii) the operation would not interfere, jeopardize or
sabotage his law practice qua standing or reputation
with the Law Society or any other law society, with
members of the legal profession, the judiciary,
administration of justice officials, employees and agents
and the general public;

(iv) when the operation was formally concluded, CSIS

would terminate all formal and informal association,
contact, dealings and involvement, direct or indirect,
with the Plaintiff and his personal, professional and
business interests; and would not involve him without
his knowledge or consent to having an association,
dealings or involvement, official or unofficial; and

(v) Plaintiffs personal and professional privacy and the

privacy of his clients would be preserved and impacted
as minimally as possible to effect the means and ends
of the operation.

9
58. The Defendant made fraudulent or negligent misrepresentations,
did so in order to induce the Plaintiff, and he was so induced, to
enter the Agreement, including but not limited to:

(a) the Plaintiff was not a subject or target of the operation

nor involved in any other way, directly or indirectly,
other than as described by Jim;

(b) the operation to collect information and evidence on an

alleged Russian KGB safehouse was bona fide in both
its means and ends;

(c) there was a bona fide national security interest

involved;

(d) the operation would not interfere, jeopardize or

sabotage his law practice qua business;

(e) the operation would not interfere, jeopardize or

sabotage the integrity of the solicitor-client privilege he
enjoyed between himself qua Barrister & Solicitor and
his clients,

(f) the operation would not jeopardize the health, safety,

reputation and all interests of himself, members of his
family and his friends, colleagues and associates; and

(g) the operation would terminate upon official notice being

given to that effect by the Defendant, all the
operations equipment would be removed from his
home and that there would be no other involvement,
direct or indirect, with him personally or professional,
or his family, law practice and other interests.

59. The Plaintiffs home became the location of his law practice
immediately after his call to the Alberta Bar on September 21,
1990. At all material times, the Defendant knew that his home
had become registered with the Law Society as the designated
location of his law practice.

60. CSIS and the Defendants other agency, the Royal Canadian
Mounted Police (RCMP), conspired with their own respective
employees, agents and co-conspirators from April 1990 to the
present to, and did in fact, conduct a long-term cognition

10
 experiment on the Plaintiff. The experiment was introduced into
the Plaintiffs life surreptitiously when he believed he was
patriotically assisting his country conduct surveillance on hostile
agents of a foreign government as aforesaid.

61. At no time did the Plaintiff know he was or give his consent,
express or implied, to the Defendant to be enrolled, recruited or
involuntarily compelled or influenced to participate in the
cognition experiment.

At all material times the perpetrators and colluders in the surveillance

operation and R&D program knew my mother was on the Tax Court of
Canada; and my uncle was the Senator for the Yukon.

Further, the decision-makers in the malfeasance knew the cognition

experiment, which sought to and did over the course of a decade in fact
militarize hypnosis (labelled as stealth cognition technologies), was in
violation of Parliaments ratified International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights. Its provisions require governments to obtain the consent of an R&D
subject before being enrolled. Because of the covert nature of the
operation, which commenced in or around 1988, it would take fourteen
years to ascertain that I was unknowingly recruited and what had instigated
and perpetuated it.

My research discovered extreme political nepotism and patronage dating

back to before Confederation and that the Liberal Party of Canada had
cumulatively governed for around three-quarters of the 20th century. When
examining what academics, investigative journalists and others had
published it was evident to me Canada was a mature, enviable democracy
on the outside but harbored a dark trans-generational secret: closet
authoritarianism. My analysis, sources, findings and corroborations are
annexed hereto as Chapter 3, 4 and 4B.

11
Corroboration of the circumstances I found myself in during the 1990s came
in the form of my sisters experiences; as documented in Chapter 2.

It was more than evident to me that having an uncle in the Senate and
mother on the federal bench didnt insulate me and her from egregious
abuses of power (as described herein). Because I was an outsider to what
Ive labelled the Ottawa-Toronto-Montreal triangle of power and wealth
and had upward mobility opportunities because of my family pedigree, I was
targeted for a surreptitious campaign to destroy them. The first step was to
sabotage the entrepreneurial venture I commenced in 1987.8 That was
achieved by inserting a security apparatus operative into my corporate
environment.9

The second was to cause the failure to my law practice employing the same
method and initiating other types. CSIS was mobilized at the inception of
the malfeasance.10 An extremely sophisticated, multi-agency initiative and
one that took its toll on me personally, emotionally, financially and
professionally was commenced as soon as I started my practice on October
1, 1990. Its genesis (as pled, supra) was in mid-March 1990 when CSIS
called me into its Edmonton office to pitch me on and seek my cooperation
in a bogus surveillance program. Everything that transpired professionally
and personally upon the launch of my sole proprietorship was micromanaged
to ruination.

One aspect of the operation was to exploit my marijuana addiction and,

deploying stealth cognition technologies, transform it into one involving
cocaine. CSIS wound down its fake surveillance post in February 1992 and

8
Chapter 1, pgs. 2 8.
9
Ibid., pgs. 8 9.
10
Chapter 2, pgs. 1 10.
12
that new and aggressive initiative commenced almost immediately. Within
six weeks my clientele and social circle were virtually all coke users and
dealers. I would conclude years later that the countrys political leadership
and some law enforcement and intelligence agencies executives, employees
and agents were systemic drug traffickers.

The operation led me to be ordered into a rehab facility upon the Law
Society of Alberta discovering, i.e., through back-channels being notified of,
this indisputably entrapped addiction. That and a family intervention
landed me in a detox institution in Coquitlam and later in another facility in
Maple Ridge, British Columbia. An abuse of power while in the former led to
my expulsion and living out of my car on the streets of Vancouver. I would
eventually end up residing with my mother in Ottawa for six months that
year (auditing a few courses at the University of Ottawa); and on January 4,
1993 moved to Vancouver to reside with my sister, who by that time had
become adversely impacted by the same types of human rights violations,
criminality and tortuous conduct as I had experienced in Edmonton.11 She
and I both lost lucrative careers in our respective professions. Within a
week of arrival and when she and I first went to a Vancouver nightclub the
same entrapment methodology commenced again. This time suspecting
government criminality I played along and took receipt of cocaine for some
nine months so as to collect what I perceived as vital evidence for use at
some later date.

I begin a description of her ordeal in Chapter 2 as follows:

My sister, Dr. Roma Kempo, is extraordinarily smart. She received

certificates of merit and a scholarship in her last year of high school
for academic achievement in the sciences.

11
As documented in Chapter 2.
13
 In 1985 she graduated from medical school 4 th out of 111 students
and received the John James Ower Medal and Scholarship in
pathology.

Over the coming years she would become a member of the College of
Physicians & Surgeons in British Columbia, Quebec and Manitoba and
a member of The Medical Council of Canada.

She was also very extroverted, but thin skinned. She loved life,
enjoyed and was very competent at her job and was liked by
everyone. Shortly after graduating she swiftly began earning a six
figure salary; and this was problematic for those managing the R&D
program. For left to pursue her financial goals there would be
enormous resources I could utilize to escape my nightmare should I
discover it. So they did to her what was done to me as much for that
reason, but also they were looking for another Schadenfreude
generator.

They predatorily and viciously attacked what was of high value

professionally and personally. She, like I, was covertly tag-teamed;
that is, an ensemble of security apparatus personnel were engineered
into her path and who began to micro-manipulate her life in a way
that would bring ruination to everything achieved and all that was
being sought.

What occurred to her to push her over the edge is revelatory of the vile
ethos embraced by Canadas intelligence community and security apparatus.
The Vancouver Police Department initiative described in Chapter 2 12
demonstrates a clinical psychopathology thats only become more acute and
nationally widespread over the years and decades. And its systemic due to
the multi-agency nature of the abuses of power.

Once she got back on her professional feet the malfeasant went after her
again and again and again.13 What came next corroborated the psychiatric
diagnosis.

12
Pgs. 17 20.
13
Pgs. 20 34.
14
The R&D gave them a capability that delivered both plausible deniability and
zero evidence for the legally untrained. It wouldnt be until early 2002 that I
connected the dots and concluded why the two entrepreneurial ventures14
and my law practice failed. It wouldnt be until the spring of 2006 was there
proof my sister had been compromised with stealth cognition technologies.

As I document at pg. 34 of Chapter 2:

There was evidence of stealth cognition technologies deployment ...

in the spring of 2006, when she advised me shed bought a black wig
and was parading herself as a prostitute in the downtowns red light
district. Shortly thereafter she confessed to having an insatiable
appetite for methamphetamines, crystal meth; and demanded that I
help her secure a supply.

In subsequent years there were other tell-tale signs of hypno-

manipulation. Three or four times I attended at her home to discover
shed pulled everything out of all drawers and closets, hadnt cleaned
sinks, toilets, the bath tub or floors and was living in what couldnt
but be described as a grotesque, smelly pig sty.

Further demonstrative of the diagnosis is whats documented at pg. 37 38

of Chapter 2.

The plethora of reform and accountability initiatives I conceptualized and

launched, including the lawsuit, my research and others 15, infuriated those
who were the targets of them. Hypnosis deployments that procured pain,
suffering, injury and attempts at extreme humiliation became the primary
methodology for punitive retaliation.

The anointed Paul Martin government in December 2003 initiated such an all
out cognitive and physical assault on me, and making me feel my safety was

14
The other, a legal research service, is described in Chapter 2, pgs. 13 14.
15
Comprehensively documented in Chapter 5.
15
at risk, I sought political asylum in the United States on February 19, 2004.
Doing so sent a message to him and those perpetrating said assault and fear
tactics that the administration of George W. Bush was now formally
cognizant of my multi-decade circumstance. I returned three weeks later in
part believing, now in retrospect proven accurate, that my security was no
longer in serious jeopardy. Two weeks after my return I commenced the
academic research project; and while my original findings were authored in
the spring of 2007 the process of analysis and evidence collection continues
to this day.16

The genesis of the reform and accountability initiative that followed the
completion of the first stage of research was in August 2007. I spent the
next six months conducting an edification campaign seeking to generate a
collective awareness within Canadas public sector on the federal and
provincial levels; what proved to be inefficacious.17

Because I persisted with reform and my U.S. collaboration, the malfeasant

pushed the R&D envelope further to create new ways to torture, torment
and threaten. Being a member of the Bar, I knew the power of accumulated
evidence especially when its circumstantial. At some point this type of
proof would become compelling; indisputable. To the malfeasant, this
collection was mocked because to them being criminally and civilly
untouchable was a reality that was never going to change. In support of my
allegations I submit the following for your offices consideration:

(1) Human Rights Violations, Criminality & Tortious Conduct List

(2) Human Rights Violations, Criminality & Tortious Conduct Mid-

Summer 2006

16
My sources and findings are compiled in Chapter 3, 4 and 4B.
17
The list of recipients is posted at http://recipients.yolasite.com.

16
 (3) Human Rights Violations, Criminality & Tortious Conduct April to
August 2014

The first is a comprehensive list, the categories, of all the malfeasance. The
second two comprise snapshots in time; but are representative of what I
have endured daily for all these many years. Ive tried on several occasions
to quantify the number of infractions. In correspondence dated 9 June 2014
delivered to the following I offer my estimation:

Foreign Affairs and International Development Committee &

Subcommittee on International Human Rights, Justice and Human
Rights Committee, National Defence Committee and Public Safety &
National Security Committee

Chairs, Vice-Chairs and Members:

Demonstrative of the clinical psychopathology that has acutely afflicted

the law enforcement, security and intelligence communities is how
often stealth cognition technologies are deployed daily; upwards and on
occasion in excess of one hundred times per day since February 2006.
Get your calculator out to estimate how much Ive been cognitively and
physically battered: 100/day X 365 X 8.25 years = 301,125. Thats
right, what is analogous to Chinese water torture and death by a
thousand cuts has been occasioned on me around one-third of a million
times.

Ive calculated that malfeasance of the kinds described in Human Rights

Violations, Criminality & Tortious Conduct List occurs on average upwards of
a hundred times a day. During many 24 hour periods its slightly less. And
not infrequently its more. Case in point was December 12, 2013. I
documented 209 hypnosis deployments in a two hour period; which
comprised on average 1.7 every minute.

As of the date of this correspondence Ive experienced abuses of power since

early 2006 which total upwards of 350,000 times.

17
The difference in terms of submitting evidence herein and the autumn of
2007 resides in the fact that Im now presenting viva voce, documentary and
photographic evidence of what violated the Criminal Code of Canada and
Parliament-ratified human rights codes.

Not only did the AGs federally and provincially decline to look into matters,
so did law enforcement. In or around January 2008 I was in contact with
RCMP Superintendent Mike Aubry; who at the time was the B.C. Officer in
Charge of Employee and Management Relations. He was interested in my
findings of authoritarianism, Chinese joint hegemony and stealth cognition
technologies. From January to May we talked once, sometimes twice, a
month about all these matters. In mid-May, he forwarded the file to the
Ottawa-situate head office of the Integrated National Security Enforcement
Teams.18 In September I received a declassified letter from the agency
indicating a formal investigation had been launched. The following month I
sat for a two-hour complainant interview with INSETs Sergeant Glen
Jacobson at the Vancouver City Police headquarters as part of standard
procedure.

Superintendent Aubry continued to demonstrate interest in what had been

presented:

From: Mike AUBRY (mike.aubry@rcmp-grc.gc.ca)

Sent: October-27-08 8:51:27 PM
To: bkempo@hotmail.com

Brad,

18
The organization is a collection of law enforcement and intelligence agencies that
work collaboratively investigating international situate national security threats
that may, will or did materialize in the country.
18
 I am just reading through all of your documents and I cannot find
all of the chapters in your document entitled The last democratic
fiefdom. Could you e-mail it to me. Thanks

Mike

The launch of the INSET investigation was very encouraging because it

generated a measure of credibility of what had been argued to all recipients
contacted since August 2007. And because it did the edification initiative
was expanded even more.

It didnt seem all that surprising six months after it began the investigation
was cancelled and nothing came of it. That was further proof of the total
breakdown of checks on the abuse of power in the country, that the
intelligence community and law enforcement were colluding and more
substantiated that Canada was a closet authoritarian regime in bed with the
Beijing leadership.

Just over a year after the investigation was cancelled I tried again:

From: Brad Kempo (bkempo@hotmail.com)

Sent: May-17-10 8:56:58 AM
To: todd.gilmore@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
Cc: bkempo@hotmail.com

May 17, 2010

RCMP Headquarters
Office of the Commissioner
1200 Vanier Pky, Ottawa, ON K1A 0R2

Attention: Insp. Todd Gilmore, Executive Officer

[]

19
 As indicated, being an Officer of the Court I must take all
reasonable steps to protect the integrity of its institutions; law
enforcement being one. I also have a professional duty to procure
reform where there are systemic dysfunctionalities. My spring 08
INSET complaint was pursuant to that obligation. Contacting Insp.
Baylin and Sheila Bird (Public Affairs) sought to give the RCMP one
last opportunity to be viewed by the public as having not abdicated
its law & order responsibilities. It was hoped the September 08
INSET investigation [] would deliver results. However, it was
terminated through political and geo-political interference.
Hopefully triggering the May 15, 2010 review by the Office of the
Commissioner will lead to results the public will see as being part of
the solution and not a continuation of the agency being a major
part of the multi-decade problem.

From: Todd Gilmore (todd.gilmore@rcmp-grc.gc.ca)

Sent: May-17-10 11:10:48 AM
To: Brad Kempo (bkempo@hotmail.com)

I have received your e mail. Thanks,

Todd

Todd Gilmore, Inspector/Inspecteur

RCMP-GRCExecutive Officer to the Commissioner/ Agent Excutif
du Commissaire

I then contacted the executive assistants to the RCMP Commissioner and the
CSIS Director. On May 17, 2010 an introduction was made to then
Executive Officer Todd Gilmore and a follow-up e-mail was sent to document
the call.

From: Todd Gilmore (todd.gilmore@rcmp-grc.gc.ca)

Sent: May-17-10 11:10:48 AM
To: Brad Kempo (bkempo@hotmail.com)

I have received your e mail.

Thanks, Todd

Todd Gilmore, Inspector/Inspecteur

20
 RCMP-GRCExecutive Officer to the Commissioner/ Agent Excutif
du Commissaire

My next correspondence to him comprised being more direct in my

allegation.

From: Brad Kempo (bkempo@shaw.ca)

Sent: June-01-10 11:21:57 AM
To: todd.gilmore@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
Cc: reformcoalitionofcanada@gmail.com

June 1, 2010

RCMP Headquarters Office of the Commissioner

1200 Vanier Pky, Ottawa, ON K1A 0R2
Attention: Insp. Todd Gilmore, Executive Officer

This comprises a c.c. of correspondence delivered to Nicole Currier,

Chief of Staff to the CSIS Director for your records. The RCMPs
culpability is parallel to that of CSIS. [] [Ive become an
experimentation victim for what is now a twenty-year
period [...]. That I was enslaved to it and mercilessly tortured with
the results of the military R&D add to the egregiousness of the
systemic violation. There[s been] a systemic violation of Article 7
of the Canada-ratified International Covenant on Civil & Political
Rights (human experimentation without consent) and for a military
purpose related to Chinas Soviet-style imperialism.

[emphasis added]

After sufficient time had elapsed for information, evidence and arguments to
be reviewed, a formal request was specifically made to launch another R&D
investigation:

From: Brad Kempo (bkempo@shaw.ca)

Sent: July-02-10 8:58:18 AM
To: todd.gilmore@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
Cc: reformcoalitionofcanada@gmail.com

21
July 2, 2010

RCMP Headquarters Office of the Commissioner

1200 Vanier Pky, Ottawa, ON K1A 0R2

Attention: Insp. Todd Gilmore, Executive Officer

Further to my submissions dated May 17th and June 1st, this is to

confirm our 15 minute discussion today; one in which I drew to
your attention what was articulated in the June 1st e-mail, namely
that I was recruited into an unlawful experimentation
program beginning in the late 1980s - the matter litigated in
the September 02 lawsuit - Amended Statement of Claim ... The
defendant federal govt claimed national security on the documents
it had on this matter; and claimed confidentiality to protect Chinas
govt from exposure and civil liability. These two claims of secrecy
were upheld by the federal court, and thus it ratified and protected
this institutionalized malfeasance.

[...]

[M]alfeasant parties continued to use them to inflict torturous pain

and suffering on me every hour of every day and pushed the
experimentation envelope, all in the belief they cannot be held to
account.

[...]

I formally request the RCMP undertake a full investigation.

[emphasis added]

From: Brad Kempo (bkempo@shaw.ca)

Sent: July-22-10 8:16:17 AM
To: simmonsd@smtp.gc.ca

July 22, 2010

Canadian Security & Intelligence Service

Ottawa, Ontario
Attention: Nicole Currier, Chief of Staff

22
 I just got off the phone with your RCMP counterpart, Insp. Paul
Bateman, drawing his attention to my complaint regarding
human experimentation. I described the 2002-launched Federal
Court lawsuit, my years of research and how The Sidewinder
Report proved Chinese involvement in this program and INSETs
September 08 investigation. He said hed look into it and I
encourage you to collaborate with him with the view to launching
an investigation and holding those accountable who violated
domestic and international law since the late 1980s.

[emphasis added]

To further move the matter up the chain of command and create a paper
trail of accountability, what was sent to the heads of the RCMP and CSIS was
delivered to the then Government of Canadas Minister of Public Safety, Vic
Toews:

from: Brad Kempo bkempo@shaw.ca

to: toews.v@parl.gc.ca
date: Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:07 AM
subject: from Brad Kempo

August 10, 2010

Office of the Minister of Public Safety

Parliament Hill
Ottawa, Ontario

Attention: Cheri, Special Asst. to the Minister

This is to confirm my call to you today in which I suggested that

whoever is doing the due diligence on what was presented in my e-
mail of July 29, 2010 ought to contact me directly so I can provide
an overview of what are relatively complicated and voluminous
facts and circumstances. It will expedite their review time. Also
note I spoke at length with CSID Director Faddens Chief of Staff
Nicole Currier and his Sr. Policy Advisor Andy Ellis in May and RCMP
Commissioner Elliots Chief of Staff Superintendent Bateman on
July 22nd on these matters; each of whom can provide insights
that will inform the review.

23
 from: Brad Kempo bkempo@shaw.ca
to: toews.v@parl.gc.ca
date: Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 1:24 PM
subject: from Brad Kempo
September 7, 2010
Office of the Minister of Public Safety
Parliament Hill
Ottawa, Ontario

Attention: Cheri, Special Asst. to the Minister

This is to confirm my telephone call today in which I indicated that

all the malfeasance Ive experienced over the last twenty plus
years didnt cease after I made contact with the Minister on July
29th. Ive tried everything possible since September 2002 to halt
this on-going criminality by public and private sector parties, but to
no avail. [...] As a result of the principles and policies of ministerial
responsibility, the Minister will in due course be held to account for
abdications that led to me experiencing more instances of violating
domestic and international law and pain and suffering that was
occasioned by this criminality.

No one from the Ministers office ever made contact to discuss what had
been presented. So another attempt was made ten months later:

From: vic.toews@parl.gc.ca
Sent: June-21-11 10:00:02 AM
To: article7institute@gmail.com

Good afternoon Mr. Kempo,

Thank you for your correspondence. I will forward it onto the Dept.
of Public Safety.

Regards,

Cheri Elliott
Executive Assistant | adjointe excutive
Office of the Hon. Vic Toews, P.C., Q.C., M.P. | Bureau du LHon.
Vic Toews, c.p., c.r., dput
M.P. for Provencher | dput de Provencher
Room 306 Justice Bldg. | Pice 306 difice

24
During the late summer of 2010 a second complaint was filed with the
agency that effects discipline of the RCMP.

Police Investigating Police Final Public Report

At present, anyone (including a non-citizen) who has a concern

about the conduct of an RCMP member can make a complaint to
the CPC, the RCMP or the provincial government body concerned.
[] [A]t the discretion of the Chair, the CPC may also conduct its
own investigation in the public interest or conduct a public interest
hearing.

The Deputy Commissioner refused to conduct an investigation because of

the passage of time:

From: Brad Kempo (bkempo@hotmail.com)

Sent: August-10-10 9:29:51 AM
To: lselman@opcc.bc.ca

August 10, 2010

Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner

Attention: Bruce Brown, Deputy Commissioner

Further to your correspondence of July 28, 2010, this is to advise

that I formally request you extend time for filing the complaint
pursuant to s. 79(2) of the Police Act. [...] It is in the public
interest that officers of the law be held to account for criminal
activity, and especially one as severe as fabricating evidence to
have a lawyer committed to a psych ward. Those who engaged in
this atrocious conduct are officers of the court and knew they were
dealing with a lawyer, who is also an officer of the court.

This behaviour shocks the conscience of the community and thus it

is essential that accountability be effected regardless of how much
time has passed; otherwise this kind of conduct will persist. And it
is a fair inference that Im not the only one of my professional
status or otherwise that has experienced this kind of unlawfulness.

25
My response to him not authorizing an investigation was this:

From: Brad Kempo (bkempo@shaw.ca)

Sent: August-16-10 1:54:52 PM
To: lselman@opcc.bc.ca
August 16, 2010

Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner

Attention: Bruce Brown, Deputy Commissioner

Further to my August 10, 2010 correspondence that responded to

the Letter of Admissibility, this is to advise that your decision
violates section 79(2) of the Police Act, which affords an extension
of time when it is in the public interest and where circumstances
warrant. My complaint meets both criteria. You exercised your
discretion in a way that protects police officers who engaged in
very egregious behaviour against a member of the Bar, an officer
of the court. And you did so knowingly and in a biased fashion with
the intent to protect them.

[]

[T]his is not the end of the matter, but the beginning. Govern
yourself accordingly.

The search for justice didnt focus exclusively on the federal level. Another
attempt was made locally:

From: Brad Kempo (bkempo@shaw.ca)

Sent: August-17-10 9:42:29 AM
To: gary.sparks@vpd.ca; chief.constable@vpd.ca
Cc: bkempo@hotmail.com

August 17, 2010

Vancouver Police Department

Professional Standards Division
2120 Cambie St.
Vancouver, B.C. V5Z 4N6

26
 Attention: Sgt. Gary Sparks (c.c. Office of Chief Constable Chu)

Its now been some six weeks since my hour-long introduction on

July 7th. Ive left messages since then - July 22nd, August 5th &
11th - none of which were returned. I elevated my complaint to the
status of registered with the OPCC and the Deputy Commissioner
declined to investigate. Yesterday, I sent him the e-mail
reproduced below. Its message is relevant to Professional
Standards, as it too is an accountability mechanism.

Your predecessor on the file and his superiors in the summer of

2006 who refused to investigate are culpable under those
provisions. I encourage you and your superiors not to make the
same error. How much I seek justice viz. the August 2004 incident
can be gauged by how the VPD has treated my family in the past. I
refer you to what top brass did to my sister in the early 1990s
with respect to former Constable Patrick McBride. What they did to
her is beyond unconscionable; and theres a pattern of systemic
malfeasance that leads right up to the August 04 incident and
beyond.

Neither Sergeant Sparks nor anybody from Professional Standards contacted

me after this e-mail - again seeking to totally ignore what was presented -
abdicating accountability responsibilities in the fallacious belief that doing so
would put an end to the matter.

In July 2011 another strategy was implemented. A call and follow-ups were
made to the top INSET cop in British Columbia. Surprisingly, Inspector Dan
Bond was receptive to what was being described that the research exposed.
Each and every time an e-mail was sent, he acknowledged receipt:

from: Dan BOND dan.bond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca

to: Brad Kempo <article7institute@gmail.com>,
date: Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 12:21 PM
subject: Re: from Brad Kempo Esq. (A7AI)

Brad

27
 I am confirming receipt of your email communication and
attachment.

D.N. (Dan) Bond, Insp. OIC

E Division Integrated National Security Enforcement Team
(EINSET)
Surrey-Federal Operations Building
13130-76th Ave
Surrey, B.C. V3W 2V6
Office: (604) 598-4105
Cellular: (604) 813-1474

from: Dan BOND dan.bond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca

to: Brad Kempo <article7institute@gmail.com>,
date: Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 11:17 AM
subject: Re: from Brad Kempo Esq. (A7AI)

Brad

Receipt of your email of this date and attached correspondence is

confirmed.

from: Dan BOND dan.bond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca

to: Brad Kempo <article7institute@gmail.com>
date: Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 1:50 PM
subject: Re: from Brad Kempo Esq. (A7AI)

Brad

Receipt of your email communication and attachment is confirmed.

During the course of two follow-up introductions and discussions, both of

which lasted more than forty minutes, the veteran officer offered glowing
compliments. It was then decided having established this credibility
foundation he was ready for full disclosure about the R&D program. Again
he was intrigued and complimentary.

28
 from: Brad Kempo article7institute@gmail.com
to: Dan BOND <dan.bond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
date: Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:41 PM
subject: Re: from Brad Kempo Esq. (A7AI)
November 16, 2011

Inspector Bond:

The November 1st submission presented accumulated evidence of

two decades of illegalities and improprieties being an MK-Ultra R&D
subject and torture victim.

I look forward to speaking with you in early December when youve

had an opportunity to review this additional information and
evidence which contextualizes in substantial detail what youve
received to date back to late August.

As per usual, kindly acknowledge receipt of this e-mail to ensure

delivery.

from: Dan BOND dan.bond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca

to: article7institute@gmail.com
date: Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 3:25 PM
subject: Re: from Brad Kempo Esq. (A7AI)

Brad

Receipt of your email communication is acknowledged.

However, what was experienced during the period August to November

radically changed on January 13, 2012.

from: Dan BOND dan.bond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca

to: Brad Kempo <article7institute@gmail.com>

date: Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 10:41 AM

subject: Re: from Brad Kempo Esq. (A7AI)

Brad

29
 Call me at my office. I am having trouble locating your telephone
number.

Dan

Why did he want to get hold of me? The shocking revelation was
documented, sent to him and acknowledged as received:

from: Brad Kempo article7institute@gmail.com

to: Dan BOND <dan.bond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
date: Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 4:09 PM
subject: Re: from Brad Kempo Esq. (A7AI)

Inspector Bond

Find attached concluding correspondence. And as per usual I look

forward to acknowledgement of receipt. If its not forthcoming Ill
be compelled to print it out and fax it to you so as to have delivery
on record - a process lawyers engage in all the time when giving
notice to parties.

from: Dan BOND dan.bond@rcmp-grc.gc.ca

to: article7institute@gmail.com,
date: Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 6:26 PM
subject: Re: from Brad Kempo Esq. (A7AI)

Receipt of your email communication and attachment is

acknowledged.

Dan Bond, Insp OIC INSET

The documenting correspondence stated the following:

January 13, 2012

Integrated National Security Enforcement Team

13130-76th Ave
Surrey, B.C. V3W 2V6

30
Attention: Inspector Dan Bond OIC

Dear Sir:

Re: In Conclusion

This is to confirm our telephone conversation today in which you

indicated your office was terminating interest and involvement in
what was presented.

Its your official position on behalf of INSET that there is no merit

to my submission and evidence Ive been an MK-Ultra R&D victim
since the late 1980s and repeatedly stated I was suffering from a
mental condition that required psychiatric help. Part of my rebuttal
consisted of drawing to your attention the Federal Court litigation
which was terminated on a nominal technicality before reaching the
Examination for Discovery stage. Between its launch in September
2002 and dismissal in October 2005 Id filed over a half dozen pre-
trial motions. Each time the defendant federal government had the
right to examine me under oath an all matters pertaining to the
lawsuit with the aim of challenging the veracity of the pled
allegations. Not once did Department of Justice lawyers do so,
which had the effect of my credibility remaining intact. As an
Officer of the Court in the role of being a member of law
enforcement you are not at law entitled to substitute that result
with your own opinion.

Second, there is a sixty year history of MK-Ultra experimentation.

Many dozens of Canadians came forward in the 1970s and 1980s
extracting tens of millions of dollars from the federal government
for their suffering and loss. Therefore, its not inconceivable this
program would re-emerge and seek to achieve that which was
sought and unattained back then.

[]

[D]uring our two or three lengthy telephone conversations in

August, September and October you repeatedly complimented me
on my intelligence and the professional nature of my submissions.
To now assertively argue I suffer from a mental disorder that
requires medical attention stands in sharp contrast to that previous
view; and so much so it raises questions why you would change
your perceptions so radically. There are several likely
explanations; and I prefer to leave that assessment to some future

31
 date when INSET will be critically examined and subject to reform
and accountability. As I said in a recent e-mail, it is in your best
interests to keep a detailed record of everything so when these
matters are closely examined you can explain your conduct and
omissions.

There it was again and from a source one wouldnt expect: that aggressive
reliance on medical slander and psych wards to intimidate, coerce, harass
and generate a climate of fear to silence reformers and those seeking justice
That Inspector Bond went from glowingly complimentary to this posture that
recalled what occurred to me in August 2004, February 2005 and June 2007
and to my sister in January 2007, October 2009 and January 2012 (as
described supra) is more evidence of authoritarianism, Chinese joint
hegemony and how much the law enforcement constituent of the
administration of justice has been ideologically corrupted.

The reform and accountability process persisted through to last year. I

delivered a series of submissions to all MPs, chairs and vice-chairs of
relevant parliamentary committees.19 Nothing whatsoever came of my
efforts.20

The malfeasant operate behind an almost impossible to penetrate national

security curtain, the courts have demonstrated they protect them and there
are no independent, efficacious internal review protocols, political or
otherwise, to examine their behavior and deliver reform and accountability.

What also is different now than just a little more than 7 years ago is that
the Obama administration may be willing if formally asked to provide access
to its vast intel archives on the perpetrators; as theyve been monitoring

19
Two of them are reproduced in Chapter 1, pgs. 37 48.
20
I also draw to your attention Vancouver Police Department File No. VA15 128135
and my submissions; an initiative commenced on July 20, 2015.

32
them all in terms of stealth cognition technologies R&D and deployment and
what the Peoples Republic of China has in this country that are antithetical
to American interests.

Its my informed view there is a desire to confront and reverse a build-up of

Chinese military and intelligence assets thats insidiously occurred over the
last 4 decades. One primary motivation is the fact that the communist
government is on an undisputed trajectory to becoming a global superpower
by mid-century and it maintains a threatening presence in Americas
immediate backyard.

While the past thirteen years have not delivered what I sought when first
launching the Federal Court of Canada litigation, I am now, as I have been
for quite some time, in receipt of that which demonstrates Canada is in
material respects a failed state. Perhaps your office can turn the tide.

Best regards,

Brad Kempo Esq.

33