Tuesday, June 07, 2005

Edited out: overview

"Buckets," you might be asking, "how many edits were there in the originally released tape?" There were many; that is clear. Over the last day or so, I've pointed out these:The list could be lengthened considerably: the newly released tape of Grewal's conversation was 15 minutes longer than the tampered tape and the transcript was 16 pages instead of 11. (See here)

To appreciate how many edits there were and how much is missing, I've created a little slide show for you here. Be patient, it takes some time to load. The yellow is what had been edited out of the original version.

(Don't miss page 8! It is the only page without yellow!)

Update. For those who want to see individual pages, go here.

Update 2. For those who want a permanent memento of the Grewal tapes, you can download your handy-dandy colour-coded pdf (roughly the equivilant of the slide show) by going to http://ryanthiessen.com/uploads/buckets/Bucket's-Grewal-Dosanjh-Murphy.pdf (about 8 megabytes).

Update 3. There is now a more easily readable version here.

[edited and revised several times]


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Buckets, this is dynamite. Love your work.

You are going to need columns at some point for comparison of all the versions - I fear that the package GG was trying to get to Ottawa in a hurry was tapes.

Presumably, if GG did edit the tapes, he would not have copied over the originals. What was so urgent that it had to be in Ottawa on Saturday and couldn't wait for Sunday? Could it be the ORIGINAL TAPES?

Get ready for more transcripts...

10:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


1. Who did this?

2. Did Harper know?

3. Who left the OLO/Communications? Did they do so before being fired for altering the tapes transcripts?

4. Did they have the full versions all along?

1:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The possibility that some of the edits were made once the tapes had passed from Grewal's hands is an interesting one.

At the very least the infamous "cup of tea" deletion shows that edits were made after the CPC got the tapes.

Does that explain the throwaway line in today's Globe story:

"Mr. Harper, who is about to lose two key members of his communications team because they have resigned to pursue other opportunities, did not address the issue of the tapes yesterday."

3:01 PM  
Anonymous D. C. Macdonald said...

I couldn't have believed this was possible, that the CPC could be this blasé about these differences. Added up you are looking at well over a dozen separate points of deletion between the "original" release and the latest release, and these all happened "by accident"?!? Just how credulous and stupid does the CPC leadership think the Canadian public is?

This is something I simply am still having a hard time getting my head around, that the CPC leadership could be this arrogant/moronic. Given I've had a fairly dismal view of the CPC from it's inception, it takes doing to go even lower than I had thought possible, yet here we are. I can no longer accept the explanation that these deletions are the result of anything other than intent, they are simply too many and they *all* happen without ever cutting words up, which taking the CPC explanation at face value should have occurred as well, but they did not.

As I have noted before, you have done outstanding work with these tapes, Buckets. You have clearly shown that there are many questions regarding their reliability, integrity, and accuracy in the case being made with these tapes against the Liberals, and done so in a manner which shifts the onus back onto the CPC. The fact that much of the conservative online community spends all of it's time trying to discredit any sound expert from arguing these tapes were altered is telling.

The argument they use regarding being unable to discern editing from digital copies makes it obvious how little they understand about this sort of thing. The only thing originals are needed for is to prove beyond all doubt that alterations happened. You can still detect evidence of probable alteration from copies, and that is all what the experts have said, but of course why let facts and reality get in the way of a smear job, eh?

The CPC also has left itself wide open for questions that it is the one that did these deletions/alterations to the tapes, and I have to wonder if that crosses any laws, given they were presented to Canadians as complete accurate recordings of the government breaking the law. I know providing false testimony and evidence gets you a criminal charge in the courts, so I have to wonder whether there is an equivalent for what the CPC appears to have done. In any event, this is going to be fascinating to follow.

3:05 PM  
Anonymous zorpheous said...

Oh then there is the small matter of Mr. Harper using these "editted" tapes in the house to bash the Liberals. Is he going to use the Bush Defense, "I didn't know"

And the CPC harper-bots question why I won't support the CPC? The CPC look just as sleezy as the liberals, but far less compedent.

So who do you support?

a) Compedent crooks
b) incompedent crooks
c) none of the above.

3:27 PM  
Anonymous zorpheous said...

Get ready for the storm Buckets, the Blogging Harper-bot will be after you soon enough. Let me know if you recieve anything threatenning in nature. I'll give you great details later via secure comm channels.

4:12 PM  
Anonymous koby said...

good stuff. Although you do not want to publish it somewhere, I wish you would.

4:18 PM  
Anonymous koby said...

"Mr. Grewal was a "no-show" on the Saturday flight, but he and his wife, Nina, who is also an MP, were on the Sunday flight to Ottawa."


What do you think the chances of Grewal expensing the Sat flight are?

4:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You know what, all of these edits are just inexcuseable. But so is a lot of the stuff without yellow highlighting.

4:37 PM  
Anonymous Zorpheous said...

Buckets you made Zarby


4:59 PM  
Blogger PR said...

Wow, that's quite the work. How much time do you think you put into it?

6:26 PM  
Blogger buckets said...

peter. Thanks. Once I realized that this is the way to do it, about an hour: I printed the new transcript, went over with a high-lighter against my annotated versions of the original transcript; scanned the document; mounted it in flickr; defined them as a set; hit the slide-show link. Voilá. (The hard work was pouring over the tapes over the weekend trying to figure out how exactly they were different from the original transcript.)

6:36 PM  
Blogger daveberta said...

Good Work!

(I linked to the slideshow from my blog)

6:44 PM  
Anonymous ryan said...

Looking over the document with the edits as a whole, it is impossible to conclude that the edits were anything but intentional. With the "blogging tories" and Harper still claiming the edits were accidental technical glitches, this is really nice evidence to see exactly what and where the edits occurred. Most of the edits were in places where they changed the tone of the conversation, and more often than not complete segments.

With people like you taking the incredible time to pull out the facts, this whole farce will come unravelled sooner than later. For about the third time (perhaps more), thanks buckets.

8:59 PM  
Blogger Meaghan Champion said...

Oh Look, It's Peter Rempelia. Peter doesn't want to deal with any of the matters about Harper telling lies about the tampering of the tapes, or the lies of Gurmy about the contents of the tape and tampering...

All Peter wants to know is how much time did Buckets spend in doing this analysis.

Yes. Peter. You so want to deal with the truth in these matters.

11:17 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home