Return to Index  

STS103

May 2 2017 at 9:06 AM
Ken Joyce 


Response to Very Sorry

Hi Dean

No problem. I do come on strong. That is something I need to work on. This has become somewhat of an obsession.
Originally I simply intended to complete my series on Canadians in Airborne and Special Operations roles. I was
not deliberately trying to find dirt on anyone, it found me. It began when dates and circumstances did not add up. Then
I came across the files of those hired by SIS to recruit Communists in the US and Canada. Those files essentially
prove, from their own admittance, that something not above water was going on. This then led me to what happened in Canada
at the end of 1945 with regard to Gouzenko. I noted that the very same bureaucrats that were involved in this secret Communist
recruiting scheme were also heavily involved in silencing Gouzenko. He was never permitted, under interrogation, to name those
within the Canadian Government that he suspected were either directly involved with Soviet espionage or had strong pro-Communist
sympathies. It was only later in his life that he began to reveal what he knew and his suspicions. Every method that Gouzenko put forward to the
Government ( remember all those in control of intelligence matters remained members of the Liberal Party despite the short changes in government. )
to weed out Soviet espionage was denied.

A good example of how much those in the Liberal Party maintained control over these matters is the
investigation into Herbert Norman. After three supposedly "in-depth" investigations by External Affairs and the RCMP, he was deemed by Pearson
to be clean. This after continual protests by the US and Britain. After a shake up in British Intelligence they revealed that Norman had been a
member of the Communist Party. Pearson continued to block any attempt to have Norman ousted. At that time he was Ambassador to Egypt during the Suez
Crisis. This at a time when Nasser sought the help of the Soviets. The pressure being applied by the US and Britain apparently made Norman commit suicide. The Canadian media, for the most part, referring to McCarthy tactics, stated he had essentially been murdered by the pressure applied by the US. To sum up, we now know that Norman was indeed working for the Soviets. In fact most of those investigated by Senator Joe McCarthy have now been revealed to have been working for the Soviets. Yet we still refer to "McCarthyism" when discussing convicting people without due process. That in itself is also up for debate. The Communists were masters of character assassination.

What truly makes me sad is that most media/publishers etc. will not publish this information strictly on political grounds. They are not interested in the truth, they
simply want to continue to cover this up in order to protect their political bias. Remember that these people were NOT Liberals. They were using the Liberal Party to gain control. Some saw Liberalism as being somewhat compatible with Communism. Remember the NDP did not yet exist. They were a spawn of the Communist Party and the Labour Progressive Party as well as the CCF. Something you will not find the facts about either anywhere. The leader of the LPP being convicted of working for the Soviets.

Time continues to make the deniers look like the politically bias idiots they truly are. As more and more information is released, we learn more and more about
those once thought to be innocent victims.

This is why reading books about STS 103 printed in the 1980's or based on interviews with veterans will not get you the truth. As I mentioned, much of the meat of what was really happening has just been released. In fact I am still waiting for the release of records concerning many of the Italian's trained at STS 103 and I am sure that will also reveal some interesting facts. The SOE service files are sparse. You need to get into SIS and SOE policy files. That is where the real info lurks. Remember that STS 103 was a British camp, the info will be in Britain, not in Canada.

Anyway I really appreciate your apology. There is nothing wrong with being skeptical, in fact I encourage it. There is too much knowledge being denied people
due to the deliberate hiding of the facts. Hunting down both sides of the story and being skeptical is what we need today. That should drive research.

Regards

Ken

 
 Respond to this message   
Responses

canadiansoldiers.com