The Shotgun Blog
« A small point on gay marriage | Main | Is Human Nature the Problem? »
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
So who erased the tapes?
In breaking news, the suspects in the 1985 Air India bombing have been found not guilty, and of course there is outrage from the families of the victims, as there should be. The implication here is that Talwinder Singh Parmar, shot by Indian police in 1992, is the primary guilty party. Even though CSIS was following around Parmar, he was never brought to justice in Canada.
I'll refer you back to a CBC story "What did CSIS know?" from Aug. 27, 2003 about the 150 tapes of wiretaps of Parmar erased by CSIS.
In an internal 1996 report marked "Secret," Inspector Gary Bass, now assistant commissioner of the RCMP, said, "Numerous intercepts of high probative value between several of the co-conspirators leading up to the bombing were destroyed. There is a strong likelihood that had CSIS retained the tapes…that a successful prosecution against at least some of the principals in both bombings could have been undertaken. Had CSIS co-operated fully from June 23rd onward, this case would have been solved at that time."
The head of CSIS back in 1985, Ted Finn, lost his job over the Air India file, but his successor, Reid Morden, still says CSIS was right to erase the tapes.
"It was judged that they had no intelligence value, which is the reason that the judge gave CSIS the wiretap authorization in the first place," Morton [sic] told CBC News.
In light of the end the trial and if there is to be a public inquiry, the first question everybody should ask is; who exactly erased the tapes? After all, in order to decide that the tapes were of no value, you had to have listened to them. And if you listened to them, then you know what was on them. That person should be able to clear this up pretty readily. Also, who authorized that the tapes be erased? Did they listen to them, too? Finn might know. I don't know where he is right now.
I'll bet you Reid Morden knows. After all, he immediately succeeded Finn and if he didn't bother to answer those questions, at least internally, he would have been grossly negligent. He's right there in the CBC article, defending the decision. So somebody should ask him.
We know where Reid Morden is. He's busy right now investigating the oil-for-food scandal at the United Nations where, you'll recall, he appears to be covering up for his former employee United Nations Deputy Secretary-General Louise Fréchette.
Posted by Kevin Steel on March 16, 2005 in Current Affairs | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200d8345807d569e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference So who erased the tapes?:
» Reader Tips from small dead animals
Posting here is about to slow down considerably. I leave tomorrow for North Carolina to give a seminar, followed by a week of dog shows. While I will have computer access, time to write will be limited. If I can... [Read More]
Tracked on 2005-03-16 8:18:20 PM
Comments
Parmar was a CIA asset. That is why CSIS never arrested him, and why they erased tapes to protect him. If you dig a little deeper, I suspect you will turn up a connection between Parmar, Bin Laudin and George Bush.
Remember something, Bush and Carlyle had "interests" that the Indian Government opposed.
Its a sad day when Justice can fail because the Crown has allowed foreign intelligence operatives to infiltrate and corrupt CSIS.
How else do you explain the hundreds of hours of erased tapes, except as a coverup ordered from on high.
This is the exact same shit that the CIA did with Hal Banks.
Criminals, every last one of them. The obstruction of justice smells to high heaven.
My sympathies to the victims of this crime.
Posted by: Joe Green | 2005-03-16 1:35:06 PM
One last item, these crimes took place when Mulroney was Prime Minister. Say it ain't so.
Posted by: Joe Green | 2005-03-16 1:36:43 PM
Oh Yes, one other little detail. This all took place when Brian Mulroney was Prime Minister.
So the need to cover up the dirty deals done by Mulroney and the Reagan crooks operating Iran Contra is crystal clear. For the Crown to look this dumb and this stupid, means that CSIS is covering up some very big American fish.
Would it not be ironic if the taps showed just how deeply the CIA was involved blowing up airliners in the West as a sort of agent provocateur???
Posted by: Joe Green | 2005-03-16 1:43:07 PM
"Would it not be ironic if the taps showed just how deeply the CIA was involved blowing up airliners in the West as a sort of agent provocateur???"
"Is everything a conspiracy with you nutters?"
And all this time I thought they were friends.
Posted by: Occam's Carbuncle | 2005-03-16 2:00:48 PM
"Is everything a conspiracy with you nutters?"
Looks like Joe just answered your question, Rahbert.
Posted by: TimR | 2005-03-16 2:13:38 PM
You know, I'm wondering if 'Joe Green' is actually 'Joe Vialls'. The latter is also a Conspiracy Advocate who also links everything, and I mean everything, to the Jews, Bush, the CIA, the Americans, Israel and etc.
Posted by: ET | 2005-03-16 2:14:04 PM
Joe is vile.
Joe Vialls is a PI.
Is E. Zun..., whats his name, back in Germany? Does he have access to the Net?
Does Joe talk to Zun...?
Posted by: maz2 | 2005-03-16 3:02:45 PM
Every right thinking person (no pun intended)should feel revulsed at this lack of justice. What really makes me go "arrrrgh" is a reported $100 million dollars spent on this case since 1985. (corus radio news, March 15) Also, according to this radio report many witnesses have been silenced by threats on their lives. My guess is that the truth will eventually come out (in 5 - 10 years) and there will be much embarrassment over ineptitude and mishandling of the evidence. And obligatory public apologies, all too little too late.
Posted by: Jack | 2005-03-16 5:44:21 PM
Forget conspiracy! How about inefficiency, lack of funds, too much bureaucracy, all the things that Paul Palango spelled out 5 or 6 years ago. Talk to any old time RCMP and he'll have a story illustrating what has happened to the R.C.M.P.
Posted by: David Stern | 2005-03-16 8:08:33 PM
Robert: there wasn't any proof of their innocence. They were acquitted because the judge was suspicious of the key witness's story. There will probably (hopefully) be an appeal.
Even if they aren't guilty, that means that there's still millions of dollars and thousands of hours needed to find the real culprits.
I blame CSIS.
Posted by: Dylan | 2005-03-16 8:56:29 PM
I don't know that anyone is suggesting that there is a conspiracy here other than the regular, ever-ongoing conspiracy of bureaucracies to cover their asses, sometimes by blaming other bureaucracies.
(When I posted this I was researching Morden's bio for another matter and his name kept popping up as someone who had commented extensively on Air India and defended CSIS. At a public inquiry he's a given, so ask him the question says I and clear up this matter of the tapes. The dig at Morden and the Volcker commission's obscuring of Frechette's involvement in the oil for food scandal is justified and at very least probably a decent example of how flunkies protect each other.)
Anyhoo, the trial began what? 19 months ago, 18 years after the incident. So the Crown, the RCMP and CSIS have 18 years to make a case and when they finally do, the accused are acquitted of all charges. Amazing stuff.
On CBC Newsworld this afternoon, Morden was interviewed, giving analysis, saying things like obviously there were problems between the RCMP and CSIS back then but things are much better now. The interviewer rightly pointed out that maybe that should be proved to Canadians.
Why? Lots of people murdered. No one brought to justice. The end. So what do we say? Hurrah the system works?
Posted by: Kevin Steel | 2005-03-16 10:01:02 PM
Dylan says, "Robert: there wasn't any proof of their innocence."
Ummmm.. Dylan.. the onus is on the Crown to prove guilt. It don't work the other way around, thank God.
You may also want to look up the word "proof" sometime as well. The court systems in Canada and the UK have philosophically recognized over the years that "proof" is a fuzzy concept when it comes to justice.
So instead of proof, we have "beyond a reasonable doubt."
There is a difference between "beyond a reasonable doubt" and "proof."
Posted by: Ian Scott | 2005-03-16 10:03:00 PM
The lack of justice is not that guilty people (if indeed they are) got off, rather the fact that all this time and money is wasted and we still don't know "who dun it". The plane did not blow up by itself. That is why I go "arrrgh". Is it not frustrating? And is it not hurtful for those waiting for justice this long? Unfortunately, it's the kind of thing that could stir people to take their own revenge. Which I am not for. And, by the way, I believe the judge made the right decision according to the evidence. However, one key witness was assassinated and others apparently have been silenced through threats.
Posted by: Jack | 2005-03-16 11:57:36 PM
It is pretty obvious to me that the Air India flight was bombed by political terrorists. These terrorists attacked Air India flights because the Government of India was clamping down in India on Sikh revolutionaries that were seeking the violent overthrow of a democratic government within India itself.
This also took place during the Afghan war against the Soviet Union that had invaded the country. There is NO DOUBT that Osama Bin Laudin was recruited by the CIA, was supplied vast sums of money and equipment, arms and ammunition to fight the Russians.
Now there is little doubt that terrorist organizations maintain connections with each other around the world. The IRA maintains contacts with the Red Brigades, and they in turn have connections with Al Quada somewhere in the food chain. In many instances, its secret government organizations like the CIA and CSIS that "connect the dots" for these criminal organizations.
Its pretty obvious to me that CSIS was up to its ass in this conspiracy to blow up the Air India flight, and did nothing to stop it. Instead, they do what all secret government criminal organizations do, and that is to hide, to evade, and to lie about it.
And certainly the Mulroney Government had to have known everything that CSIS was reporting to them. It would be unbelievable if CSIS, having uncovered a plot to blow up a jumbojet would not have informed the Prime Minister, Mr. Mulroney.
But Mulroney, always looking for fresh opportunities to curry favour for himself with Ronald Reagan, would have suppressed anything about the CIA that might come out in Canada. Mulroney was not called "Lyin Brian" for nothing.
This trial quite obviously was about the bottom men on the totem pole, and three participants in this criminal conspiracy have yet to be identified. You can think of the accused as the Lee Havey Oswalds of this case, while those at a higher level have killed off witnesses, and destroyed the evidence of their crimes.
Remember, CSIS DESTROYED EVIDENCE. And their fearless leader says quite brazenly that this was the "right thing" to do.
Well if you are covering up crimes by the CIA, I guess it was the right thing to do.
But that is cold comfort to the victims and the families in this crime. And its even less of a comfort to Canadian citizens who fund CSIS and the Cabinet Ministers that are supposed to provide oversight to these "government agents".
Seems to me, that there is a good case to disband CSIS as a criminal organization, and order the RCMP to keep looking until it can figure out what the hell was going on that fateful day in Vancouver some 20 years ago.
Furthermore, if the US can offer $30M for information leading to the arrest and conviction of Osama Bin Laudin, do you not think that Canada should have posted a reward of $10M leading to the arrest and conviction of those responsible for this act of terrorism that originated on Canadian soil???
I think so, and if the weasels at the top of the CIA were involved, Canadian arrest warrents should have been issued internationally for them.
And if the FBI would not co-operate with an extradiction proceeding, that too would have led to further consequences for the Americans because this sort of "official crime" is utterly intolerable for any society that wishes to call itself "civilized".
Posted by: Joe Green | 2005-03-17 6:11:10 AM
"secret government criminal organizations"
Joe - this is a public forum. Now they'll know that you know!
Posted by: Occam's Carbuncle | 2005-03-17 5:24:18 PM
Hmm, conspiracy!
Remember that a conspiracy assumes competence. There is no evidence of competence, even at the lower threshold of a civil case.
The judge came to the only decision possible in a criminal case. There was no evidence.
Listening to the various officials and politicians confirm my belief that two issues drove the (mis)handling of this case: brown people from Vancouver, and how this situation profoundly challenges how we see ourselves as a country. Some former CSIS guy blithely 'explains' everything as an understandable personality / departmental conflict. Happens every day.
This proves beyond a reasonable doubt that you can murder 329 people in Canada and get away with it. Just make sure there isn't any bodies, and that the victims aren't from a key riding, and preferably immigrants. We wouldn't want to hurt anybody important's feelings now.
Derek
Posted by: Derek | 2005-03-17 7:19:21 PM
In is interesting that anyone who asks a pertinent question about serious errors in policy or judgement is automatically labelled as a "nutter". However, some people have attention spans that can remember the lies from yesterday. The erasure of tapes tapes does not bode well in history. An American President fell from grace once who gained great noteriety from the erasure of tapes. Still we learn little. I remember the Globe&MAil on June 4th, 2003 - 'Suspected CSIS mole carried Air-India bombs, Mountie said'. I remember it well.
On June 21st, 1985 CSIS intercepted a phone call between Surjan Singh Gill and Talwinder Singh Parmar. Reference to a bomb, a plane ticket, and a terrorist were made. Yet somehow with all that knowledge, no one could have had time to warn airlines and/or airports. Perhaps only Insp. Clouseau and Barney Fife are allowed to find employment in the police and intelligence services, but at least they're enough on the ball to erase the tapes while they ask for more money, more power, and more control; and the anti-nutters are nuts enough to give it to them.
Posted by: George French | 2005-03-22 8:55:20 AM
Want a better idea of the level of, uhmmm, "integrity" of former CSIS director Reid Morden? This is the guy who said CSIS was right to erase the Air India tapes. He's the Chair of the Board of Trent University - an organization that is ripe with problems of malfeasance in management.
Morden, the figurehead Chair, can't keep this organization under control either. Lucky for him, Ontario universities are NOT subject to Freedom of Information legislation so there is absolutely no public accountability for the mis-use of public money. Somewhat like CSIS, no?
Check out http://www.ourtrent.com/news for yourself (do a search for "Reid Morden")!
Oh yeah, Morden is now on the Volcker Inquiry and Morden himself may not be free of conflict of interest. See: http://www.ourtrent.com/news/archives/2004/12/trent_board_cha.shtml
Posted by: S. Daniels | 2005-04-29 11:38:19 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.