A little light editing - Macleans.ca

A little light editing


Ahead of more testimony at the Afghanistan committee today, the Globe reports that Richard Colvin was asked to delete portions of his reports.

Canada’s former ambassador to Afghanistan asked a diplomat to erase two bluntly worded sections from an April, 2007, report on how Ottawa’s delays in notifying the Red Cross of prisoner transfers to Afghan authorities left these detainees vulnerable to abuse.

The Globe and Mail has learned that Arif Lalani asked for the edits from Richard Colvin, a diplomat at the centre of an unfolding controversy over whether Canada turned a blind eye when handing prisoners to Afghanistan’s torture-prone authorities.

This editing took place in April, 2007, only days after a Globe investigation revealed disturbing allegations of abuse and torture among prisoners transferred by Canadians to Afghan detention – stories that kicked off a stormy debate in Ottawa.


A little light editing

  1. Boy, someone is leaking to the Globe big time!

  2. '…April, 2007, only days after a Globe investigation revealed disturbing allegations of abuse and torture…'

    So the G&M did a far far better job of investingating detainee abuse than did Colvin. (going outside the wire for more than 1/2 day might have been the ticket)
    And in May 2007 a new detainee arrangement had been worked out, the result of work done prior to the G&Ms investigational report.

    It looks like Christie was right, Colvin jumped on the G&M bandwagon as it drove by.

  3. Yawn……zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

  4. Some two, at the very least. To different Globe employees.

  5. And the entire rest of the government of Canada worked overtime to pull Colvin back down. But congratulations for keeping up with the latest spin, wilson.

    Incidentally, it was Globe reporting that unearthed Adscam too. Guess once the Globe had it, governments should ignore that one too?

  6. So CON damage control includes the fetal-hibernation state?

  7. I think that Wilson's point is that a month later the government had a new, much more complex arrangement in place, which included measures for tracking detainees, and onsite visits.

    Is this the only instance of Colvin's superiors editing his copy? If so, he has a better record than most bureaucrats.

    But I suppose that a grand conspiracy by the "entire rest of the government" to ensure that detainee torture issues were ignored makes for better copy.