Air India report: American-style security czar needed to end agency turf wars
Thursday, June 17th, 2010
From Wikipedia: During an interview with Bagri on 28 October 2000, RCMP agents describe Surjan Singh Gill as an agent for CSIS saying the reason that he resigned from the Babbar Khalsa was because his CSIS handlers told him to pull out… A Security Intelligence Review Committee cleared CSIS of any wrongdoing. However, that report remains secret to this day. The Canadian government continues to insist that there was no mole involved.
The police interview being referred to is here. (Refer to page 51). So if CSIS knew for months a bomb was being constructed and if they had an agent, a mole, in the organization – the same old pattern – then why did the bombing go forward? Was it really just jurisdictional infighting? On Jan 26, 2000, a former CSIS agent told the Globe that the reason that hours of taped evidence was destroyed was because it was feared the RCMP wouldn’t protect the identities of informants. Indeed. Obviously time and the machinations of intelligence agencies have obscured the facts here, but a few hours of research into the documents make it clear there’s a coverup. The Indian newspaper Tehelka contains a report that a Punjab human rights NGO called PHRO conducted an extensive international investigation into the bombing and concluded that “After the Khalistan movement gained in sympathy in the West, especially in Canada, after the 1984 Blue Star operation and the killing of Sikhs in Delhi, a plot was hatched to discredit the Sikh movement” and concluded on the forensic evidence that the suspect, Talwinder Parmar, was assassinated in police custody to prevent the exposure of Indian agents in the plot. (For more background on the case entire, see the CBC’s special page here.)
Who knows at this point. What we do know is that everybody walked but the guy who wired up the bomb, and now Canadian terror investigations are to be centralized under a new Federal office. It all seems a little too reminiscent of the MacDonald Commission:
Related: Canadians who trust our secret police should think again
Tonda MacCharles, Richard J. Brennan, The Toronto Star
June 17, 2010
OTTAWA–Families of the Air India bombing victims will receive compensation and an apology after a special inquiry report blamed a turf war between the RCMP and Canada’s spy agency for failing to prevent the disaster.
Dabbing away tears afterward, Toronto’s Shipra Rana, whose sister Shyla Aurora was on the ill-fated flight, said what bothered her most was that there were so many signs that a terrorist attack was going to happen and that so many people ignored them.
“The government knew exactly what was going to happen, they knew exactly what kind of bomb that was going to be put on the flight and they just ignored it … it wasn’t taken seriously,” Rana said after the damning report was released Thursday.
Former Supreme Court of Canada justice John Major led a four-year inquiry into the June 23, 1985 explosions that killed 329 crew and passengers, and two baggage handlers at Tokyo’s Narita airport.
In a scathing report that delves into the investigative and prosecutorial failures in the worst terrorist attack in Canadian history, Major blasts a culture of “complacency” that still threatens air travelers today.
A new report has suggested that Pakistan’s intelligence agency is supporting the Taliban in Afghanistan, providing them with funds and training.
Police in southern Ontario are reported to be searching for a man who bought what they consider to be a suspiciously large amount of fertilizer – enough, they say, to make a bomb.
On a side street off Mogadishu’s Wadnaha Road frontline a young officer is explaining the unwritten rules of the city’s intractable civil war as his men exchange fire with an unseen enemy.
They were recorded talking jihad against their fellow Americans. But they hadn’t talked the jihadists into accepting them.
Targeted killings, where lethal force is intentionally used against perceived enemies of states, sometimes using drones, blur the line of international law when carried out on foreign soil, a UN independent human rights expert says.