Friday, December 05, 2014

The Parliament Hill Shooting: What is the RCMP Hiding?

Almost as soon as the shooting stopped, and not long after he emerged from his closet, Stephen Harper declared that Canada was under attack by the dark forces of ISIS.

And starting calling the dead gunman, Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, an ISIS terrorist. Even though he was a mentally ill crack addict.

And a few days later the RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson claimed the RCMP had a video that showed that Zehaf-Bibeau had acted for ideological motives.

But now it turns out we may never see that video, and as Tim Harper points out, that's a real threat to our democracy. 

Canadians should ask questions regarding this about-turn. If an investigation has taken a different path, we should be told. Otherwise, we are free to speculate that Paulson was told not to release the video.

There is no evidence to suggest Paulson has been reined in by his political masters, but the terrorist narrative is the convenient way for this to play out for a government tempted to use fear as a means to push legislation which could intrude on the privacy of law-abiding citizens.

Because not only would we not be able to decide for ourselves whether Zehaf-Bibeau was a real terrorist or a raving lunatic.

It leaves open the possibility that the Cons are suppressing the video, for crass political purposes. 

To help keep the Fear Factor cranked up high...

Because as this latest poll shows, Stephen Harper has benefited mightily from that terrorist scare. 

Stephen Harper’s Conservatives have pulled into a neck-and-neck race with Justin Trudeau’s Liberals, both nationally and in vote-rich Ontario, according to a newly released poll.

And with the Cons and the Liberals in such a close race, the question of whether it was a real terrorist attack could help determine the result of the next election.

And if the RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson is being forced to suppress that tape, he could find himself in the same position the former RCMP Commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli found himself in when he influenced the result of the 2006 election. 

Former RCMP commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli's decision to name then-Liberal finance minister Ralph Goodale in a criminal investigation likely influenced the 2006 federal election, the chair of the RCMP public complaints commission says.

Which could lead to other embarrassing questions like why wasn't Nigel Wright charged? Or why is the force not investigating the robocall scandal?

So as Tom Mulcair says, Paulson really does need to explain himself:

“He’s got to explain to Canadians why he’s changed his mind,” Mulcair said this week. “Until then, people are going to be able to speculate as to whether or not someone was involved in deciding that it wouldn’t be made public.”

Or run the risk that many Canadians might come believe that we are already living in a police state...

In a dangerous time, in the grip of a ghastly dictator and a foul regime who are always twisting the truth or muzzling it for political advantage, the truth has never been more important.

The tape must be released as soon as possible.

Because the very fate of this country might depend on it...

Please click here to recommend this postal Progressive Bloggers.


Steve said...

Simon take a look at the biggest sellout. The future of food.

Anonymous said...

Right on Simon.And that's not the only questions that need answering.The Evan Soloman description of the shootout and Vickers Rambo style attack on Bibeau and the alledged 9 bullet holes.Apparently,according to the videos in this link,those markings on the wall were there a few years ago when google took pictures.Maybe there's a common sense explanation for all this.All Canadians need an explanation.CBC did say a short while later that they had made a mistake about the 9 bullet holes,so why did Soloman not know this before.Who was his source for the original report on the National with Wendy Mesley???? So many questions.So little time.Simon would like to hear your take on these videos if you have seen them already.


thwap said...

I can't begin to imagine the shit-headdery required to look at harper's cowardly response to two deranged murderers and think "Duh! harper is leadership material ferrsherrr!"

Anonymous said...

royal CONSERVATIVE mounted police.
Any questions?

Unknown said...

Other possibility perhaps there is no tape never was and Paulson was ordered to lie by Herr Harper and foolishly he did so. The whole thing smacks of a politically motivated maneuver to give the cons a boost in their sinking ratings against the Libs.

So suppose there was a tape why did Paulson not act upon it before the shootings. It is a well known CIA tactic to convince mentally unbalanced people to go and shoot one of their own targets. John Hinckley junior was such a guy that attempted to assassinate Ronald Regan at a speaking engagement. John Hinckley senior was a close confident of George Bush senior who has been in the CIA all his life. He pioneered the first off shore oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico. Its prime purpose? Oil no a way station to ship CIA cocaine into the US it was a lucrative business for the CIA.

Anonymous said...

What if Michael Zehaf-Bibeau's purpose was an attempted assassination & the video was his manifesto about how Harper is destroying Canada.

Unknown said...

Also about the actual shooting in parliament of the lone gunman "As members of parliament begin to piece this tragedy together, they’re advised to inquire how American intelligence knew the name of a ‘possible terrorist’ as the mayhem was still unfolding. How did Americans know when Canadians didn’t, and how was this information so widespread that American media and Google had access to distribute, but domestic reporters on the scene did not.

Canadian parliamentary bureau chiefs didn’t possess the same information as their U.S. counterparts and faced the barrel of police guns as a press narrative was provided on their behalf by another country. If this is dubbed an act of terrorism that American sources had knowledge about to pre-report, then why weren’t steps taken to prevent the violence?

Many have questioned how a gunman could enter parliament with a rifle unnoticed, in spite of the massive security and busy lineups. Some are calling for greater state police control and warmed to relinquishing their Charter rights, in an effort to fight the new war on domestic terrorism. Something has to justify police militarization since the War on Drugs has been transformed into a lucrative product of capitalism."