ZGram - 1/27/2004 - "Absurdistan in Action: 'Can't tell you - National Security'"

zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org zgrams at zgrams.zundelsite.org
Wed Jan 28 13:12:17 EST 2004




ZGram - Where Truth is Destiny:  Now more than ever!

January 27, 2004

Good Morning from the Zundelsite:

Today I have a very good write-up about the Zundel hearings for you, 
but before I do so, I want to warn you that someone is causing 
mischief with the Zundelsite name via forged e-mail. 

So far, I have received letters from denis at zundelsite.org, 
sam at zundelsite.org, bill at zundelsite.org and dave at zundelsite.org. 

***None of these emails come from me.***  The ONLY email I use is in 
reference to the Zundelsite is irimland at zundelsite.org 

Also, there have been repeated attempts to slip me a virus.  So far, 
I believe I have deleted all - but just in case, run your anti-virus 
program to make sure.

On another note:  When Ernst called last night and I asked how the 
day in court had gone, there was a pause, and then Ernst said:  "We 
are documenting the decline of Canada."

If you read Paul Fromm's write-up below, you will understand.

[START]

Can't Tell You -- National Security

	TORONTO. January 26, 2004. For the second day in a row, 
defence lead counsel Peter Lindsay questioned a representative of the 
Canadian Intelligence Service (CSIS) on the witness stand in the 
Zundel hearing in Toronto. Mr. Lindsay got CSIS spokesman Dave 
Stewart to explain that a summary prepared for the then Minister of 
Citizenship and Immigration (Denis Coderre) and the Solicitor General 
Wayne Easter) last spring was a balanced document.

	In questioning that was frequently interrupted by CSIS 
counsel Murray Rodych, lead Crown Attorney Donald MacIntosh and the 
judge Mr. Pierre Blais, all of whom seemed to run interference for 
witness Dave Stewart, Mr. Lindsay slowly revealed a picture of a 
skewed document which suppressed material favourable to Mr. Zundel. 
This was the information on which the ministers based their May 1, 
2003 certificate declaring Ernst Zundel a "terrorist" and a threat to 
the security of Canada.

	Today, especially, a repeated disruptive chorus stymied Mr. 
Lindsay in his questioning. "Objection: National security," Justice 
Department lawyer Donald MacIntosh would say.

	"Objection sustained," Mr. Justice Blais, a former 
Solicitor-General and CSIS boss would respond. The judge had been 
asked by Douglas H. Christie, Mr. Zundel's former leader counsel to 
recuse himself on the basis of a "reasonable apprehension of bias" 
last fall, but he had refused.

	After considerable argument, Friday, Mr. Lindsay had won the 
right to cross-examine Mr. Stewart. As a spokesman for an "adverse" 
party, the witness, under the rules of the Province of Ontario, can 
be cross-examined in direct questioning; that is, he can be 
questioned more aggressively and confrontationally than is customary 
with one's own normally friendly witness.

	"Is it a fact that Mr. Zundel has no criminal convictions in 
Canada, despite having been here from 1958 to 2000?" Mr. Lindsay 
asked. Mr. Stewart agreed.

	"It would appear that the Ministers of Citizenship and 
Immigration and the Solicitor-General were not told that Mr. Zundel 
had no criminal record after living here for 42 years," Mr. Lindsay 
continued.

	"Not in this document," Mr. Stewart admitted.

	"Are you able to explain to us why it was not put in the 
summary that Ernst Zundel had no criminal record?" the dogged Mr. 
Lindsay pursued.

	"I did not write the summary," the CSIS spokesman answered. 
"The authors would have felt that it didn't need to be included in 
the summary," he added.

	Mr. Lindsay questioned Mr. Stewart extensively about people 
mentioned in the summary whose guilt-by-association with Mr. Zundel 
serves, in the Crown's argument, to blacken Mr. Zundel's character.

	In one of the numerous occasions when the witness was 
excluded, while the judge and lawyers argued procedure, Mr. Justice 
Blais asked; "It would be helpful for me to know why it is important 
that the summary mentions that some people have no criminal record."

	"It's important," Mr. Lindsay replied, "because the witness 
said Friday that the report purports to be a balanced document as to 
why Mr. Zundel is a threat to the security of Canada. If so, it would 
present information on both sides. Yet, the document didn't mention 
that Ernst Zundel had no criminal record. Your Lordship has examined 
secret evidence that I have no knowledge of. I'm trying to undermine 
the fairness of CSIS. How fair has CSIS been? That's going to be a 
repetitive theme."

	Mr. Lindsay then took the witness through a list of persons 
mentioned as associates of Mr. Zundel, eliciting the fact that most 
had no criminal record.

	"Marc Lemire is mentioned in the summary. Does Mr. Lemire 
have a criminal record, sir?" Mr. Lindsay queried.

	"There's no indication in the summary," Mr. Stewart admitted.

	Mr. Lindsay also drew from the witness a reluctant admission 
that several of the people  mentioned as Zundel associates were no 
longer politically active, including Wolfgang Droege, a founder of 
the Heritage Front and George Burdi, a former racialist firebrand and 
skinhead musician.

	Mr. Stewart admitted that he'd read only about half of the 
voluminous material presented with the report. "Would there be 
someone at CSIS who has read more of it," Mr. Lindsay asked.

	"Your Lordship ruled that the names of CSIS agents and the 
RCMP should not be revealed in the interests of national security," 
Murray Rodych objected.

	Arguing for his right to question which had already been 
severely restricted, Mr. Lindsay said: "My friend called no 
witnesses. He strongly objected to the calling of Mr. Stewart until 
faced with an order from the judge and he opposed cross-examination.

	"Do you know anyone at CSIS who quite likely has read more of 
the material than you have?" Mr. Lindsay again asked the witness.

	"The witness should not be permitted to say whether others 
have more information. My friend is engaged in a fishing expedition?" 
Mr. MacIntosh argued.

	"Have any of the people Mr. Zundel associated with been 
classified as a danger to the security of Canada?" Mr. Lindsay asked 
the witness.

	"I don't know," Mr. Stewart admitted.

	"Mr. Zundel lived in Canada from 1958 to 2000," Mr. Lindsay 
continued. "When did he begin to be a threat to the security of 
Canada?"

	"That goes to operations and is classified," Mr. Rodych, the 
CSIS lawyer, objected.

	"We know the answer: May 1, 2003," when the certificate of 
national security was served on Mr. Zundel, Mr. Justice Blais 
interrupted. "You're going nowhere. You're being tricky," he scolded 
Mr. Lindsay.

	"I  don't think, with respect, it's appropriate to call me 
tricky," the lanky defence lawyer retorted. "CSIS believes Mr. Zundel 
is a danger to the security of Canada," Mr. Lindsay continued.

	"That's correct," Mr. Stewart responded.

	Eventually, Mr. Stewart revealed that CSIS began to consider 
Mr. Zundel a threat to national security in 1990.

	Entering on the explosive ground that lies at the heart of 
this case -- the animosity of CSIS to Mr. Zundel and the whole right 
wing -- Mr. Lindsay inquired: "Did CSIS play any role in the creation 
of the Heritage Front?"

	"Not to my knowledge," the CSIS spokesman said.

	"Didn't a gentleman named Grant Bristow play a major role in 
the development of the Heritage Front?" Mr. Lindsay asked.

	"I recall the name, but I would say no," the witness replied.

	"Was Grant Bristow an agent of CSIS," Mr. Lindsay continued.

	Justice Department lawyer Donald MacIntosh was on his feet. 
"It's irrelevant. It's not connected to whether the certificate is 
reasonable, not whether it's true, but reasonable," he said, 
re-stating the incredible low threshold the Crown has to meet the 
triumph in this  case.

	"The question about Bristow's being an agent is not allowed," 
the judge ruled.

	"Whether Bristow is an agent of CSIS goes to the fairness of 
CSIS. The Service makes a big production of the role and dominance of 
the White Supremacist Movement and Mr. Zundel's influence in it. If 
CSIS played a role in it, it would be significant."

	"I don't think it's acceptable. We're not going to enter that 
territory. I accept the submissions of Mr. Rodych. I already made a 
decision on naming employees of CSIS and the RCMP" Mr. Justice Blais, 
the former boss of CSIS, ruled, temporarily sandbagging the defence 
counsel.

	Pursuing another tack, M. Lindsay asked: "The summary refers 
to Mr. Zundel's book The West, War and Islam. Mr. Zundel was charged 
with spreading false news with this book. Did you know Mr. Zundel was 
acquitted of this charge? Did the summary provide the results?"

	"I don't believe it does," Mr. Stewart admitted.

	The CSIS summary to the ministers mentioned that Pastor 
Butler, a Zundel acquaintance was among those charged with conspiracy 
to overthrow the U,.S. government. "Does the summary bother to 
mention that the defendants were found not guilty by an Arkansas 
jury?" Mr. Lindsay demanded.

	"It does not," Mr. Stewart again had to admit.

	"But the Ministers of Citizenship and Immigration and the 
Solicitor-General were not informed that they had been acquitted. The 
ministers were given incomplete information?"

	"That's correct," Mr. Stewart acknowledged.

	"Does CSIS believe that Mr. Zundel has engaged in terrorism, 
that he is a terrorist?" Mr., Lindsay asked.

	"Yes," the CSIS spokesman replied.


	"What if I suggest to you that Mr. Zundel is a rightwing 
extremist but not a terrorist?" Mr. Lindsay continued.

	Then, Mr. Lindsay dropped his bombshell. Reading from CSIS 
Director General Ward Elcock's testimony to the Commons Subcommittee 
on National Security, November 24, 2003, he said: "Mr. Zundel is 
certainly a widely known extremist on the rightwing side. I'm not 
sure I'd go so far as to call him a terrorist. An extremist he 
certainly is."

	"Is he testifying on behalf of CSIS," Mr. Lindsay asked.

	"I don't know," Mr. Stewart responded lamely. "I don't know 
the precise context of what Mr. Elcock is testifying to here. There 
are many definitions of terrorists."

	Mr. Justice Blais hurriedly adjourned the hearing for lunch 
wanting to know the document on which  Mr. Elcock was being 
questioned by Joe Clark in the committee hearing. The hasty 
adjournment rescued the witness.

	After lunch, Mr. Lindsay pursued the allegation that Mr. 
Zundel is a threat to national security because he's seen as a beacon 
to the White Supremacist Movement. Mr. Lindsay pointed out that the 
movement had been in decline in Canada since 1994. Yet, Mr. Zundel 
had remained in Canada from 1994 to 2000.

	"Then, did Mr. Zundel's threat to the security of Canada end 
in 1995?" Mr. Lindsay asked.

	"No. If Mr. Zundel's activities continue as they were prior 
to 1995, he'd be a threat to the security of Canada

	"So, the logical conclusion is he would be less of a threat 
since 1995," Mr. Lindsay continued.

	"I see your point," Mr. Stewart admitted. "It's difficult for 
me to say if an individual would have less impact."

	Under questioning, Mr. Stewart admitted that the CSIS 
summary, which made much of Mr. Zundel's use of the mails for 
distributing "hate literature", failed to tell the ministers that, in 
1982, Mr. Zundel's mailing privileges had been restored after a one 
year suspension on just such allegations.

	The afternoon ended with a tense exchange about the dramatic 
charges in Andrew Mitrovica's book Covert Entry: Spies Lies and 
Crimes Within Canada's Secret Service.

	"Did CSIS ever intercept Mr. Zundel's mail?" the defence lawyer asked.

	"Objection: national security," Donald MacIntosh snapped.

	"Sustained," the unsmiling former boss of CSIS ruled.

	"Did CSIS have an agent named John Farrell?" Mr. Lindsay asked.

	"Objection: national security," Donald MacIntosh snapped.

	"Sustained," the unsmiling former boss of CSIS ruled.

	The book Covert Entry suggests that "Mr. Zundel's mail had 
been intercepted by CSIS," Mr. Lindsay stated.

	"Objection: national security," Donald MacIntosh snapped.

	"Sustained," Mr. Justice Blais ruled.

	"CSIS ordered Mr. Farrell to temporarily stop intercepting 
mail to Mr. Zundel," Mr. Lindsay continued.

	"Objection: national security," Donald MacIntosh snapped.

	"Sustained," Mr. Justice Blais ruled.

	On page 140 of the book, there's the suggestion that the May, 
1885 bomb "delivered to Mr. Zundel's home had been intercepted by 
CSIS," Mr. Lindsay continued.

	"Objection: national security," Donald MacIntosh snapped.

	"Sustained," Mr. Justice Blais ruled.

	"There's the suggestion that CSIS was aware of the bomb?" Mr. 
Lindsay asked.

	"Objection: national security," Donald MacIntosh snapped.

	"Sustained," Mr. Justice Blais ruled.

	The book suggests "that CSIS knew of the potential bomb and 
did not alert Metro police, the post office or Mr. Zundel."

	"Objection: national security," Donald MacIntosh snapped.

	"Sustained," Mr. Justice Blais ruled.

	"There is the suggestion that Mr. Farrell raised the issue 
with CSIS about the danger to passengers on airplanes" that might 
have transported the bomb.

	"Objection: national security," Donald MacIntosh snapped.

	"Sustained," Mr. Justice Blais ruled.

	Court resumes Tuesday, with Mr. Stewart on the stand.

	In another development, Mr. Lindsay will appear in the 
Federal Court of Appeal (330 University Avenue) in Toronto, Wednesday 
at 10:00 a.m. to argue a motion seeking a stay of proceedings pending 
an appeal against Mr. Justice Blais's denying disclosure to the 
defence of the names of CSIS and RCMP agents involved in preparing 
the Zundel case. -- Paul Fromm






More information about the Zgrams mailing list