- Good Morning from the Zundelsite:
-
- Today, I have a very telling write-up about the Zundel
hearings to present to 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@zundelsite.org,
sam@zundelsite.org, bill@zundelsite.org and dave@zundelsite.org.
-
- ***None of these e-mails come from me.*** The ONLY email
I use is in reference to the Zundelsite is irimland@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
-
- By Paul Fromm
- 1-26-4
-
- TORONTO -- 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
|
