The redacted Colvin memos (III) - Macleans.ca
 

The redacted Colvin memos (III)


 

Here, again, is how Richard Colvin described seven memos he sent between May 26, 2006 and April 20, 2007.

And here, again, is what has been released today.

Herein, a very, very quick guide to what seems to be where. 

1. May 26, 2006. KANDH-0029.
“KANDH-0029 reports on, inter alia, the results of my investigations on the transfer of Afghan detainees,including Maj. Liebert’s informal investigation within KAF.KANDH-0029 included a ‘comments’ section and two recommendations.”
Loaded into Adobe, this document seems to appear at page 3.

2. June 2, 2006. KANDH-0032.
“This dealt with two issues, one of which concerned the risk of torture and /or actual torture of Afghan detainees … The section of KANDH-0032 that dealt with the risk of torture and/or actual torture of Afghan detainees transferred by Canada was based on a  source or sources that I assessed at the time, and assess today, as highly credible. ln general,during my 17 months in Afghanistan, I obtained information on detainee issues from a wide range of sources.This included diplomats from other embassies, NGOs, officials from UNAMA, military officers at ISAF, human-rights organizations, journalists and intelligence sources. It wouid be normal, appropriate and necessary for me in the context to rely on such sources in the course of my duties.”
This document seems to appear at page 126.

3. August 28, 2006. Unnumbered.
“It dealt with procedural issues on detainees, such as notification, and included requests and recommendations to address such procedural issues.”
Because it’s unnumbered, it’s difficult to say for sure whether it is included here.

4. September 19, 2006. KBGR-0118.
“… after meeting with two highly credible sources in Kabul , I sent a C4 message following up on the more informal 28 August message … In it, I communicated detailed and directed concerns expressed by those sources regarding current Canadian practice on detainee notifications and transfer. The report made reference to both procedural issues and substantive concerns regarding treatment of Afghan detainees.”
This document seems to appear at page 10.

5. September 28, 2006. KBGR-0121.
“Nine days later, on September 28, 2006, following a meeting with a third interlocutor, and having received no response to KBGR-0118, I sent a follow-up report, ‘KBGR-0121,’ to the same DFAIT addresses, including IDR. This report dealt with procedural issues only, but was even more direct in content than was KBGR-O118.”
This document seems to appear at page 13.

6. December 4, 2006. KBGR-0160.
“On December 4,2006 I sent another report,’KBGR-0160,’ on detainee policy issues, including concerns about treatment of detainees.”
This document seems to appear at page 27. It is almost entirely blacked out.

7. April 20, 2007. KBGR-0258.
“On April 20, 2oo7, I sent a C4 report, ‘KBGR-0258,’ on detainees. It dealt with a range of issues, including their treatment.”
This document seems to appear at page 49. It is almost entirely blacked out.


 

The redacted Colvin memos (III)

  1. I am tired, aren't you? I mean, I agree that they were to slow to fix this problem with the prisioners, but I do not believe that they did this on porpuse, Canada prides itself about our help in times of war, and bringing change, freedom and democracy to this war thorn countries…Colvin, I do not believe is a bad guy but a little bit to full of himself too, I really didn't like the way he spoke, I find it bothersome, but it was also clearly an issue…so let's just move on…shall we

  2. Obama's talking about rallying the troops to bring some semblance of order to Afghanistan and sending 35,000 new troops. I'm skeptical this will result in a big change but now I think it is time for everyone to rally behind the troops and hope that they can bring change for the better.

    And this detainee transfer issue, I agree with Claudia, it looks like it finally got fixed but we've got a war to fight, and time to move on from this issue.

  3. In other words, Colvin told the truth, othre people who smeared Colvin are liars and some may face criminal charges, so the Conservative mouthpieces want to move on and hope everyone forgets about it. Not gonna happen, folks. Harper, MacKay, and O'Connor at least are going to wear this for the rest of their lives.

  4. "the Conservative mouthpieces want to move on… Not gonna happen, folks."

    I have no doubt that the Tories want to move on. The public does too, although that's only a theory. There's no sure way of proving that (polls, maybe? They've been static since the start of these allegations, so maybe that's one way of gauging it).

    However, given the short attention spans of the opposition parties, I think we'll be forgetting it very quickly. They'll soon move on to the next shiny object that catches their eye. H1N1, giant cheques, doorknobs, stimulus funds… all more or less forgotten about, and hardly ever mentioned in the House anymore.

  5. Are you serious?

    First it was never happening, then it was that it happened but the government did not know about it, and Colvin is a liar. Now that it has been established that it was happening and that the government knew about it, you are "tired" of all this and wish it would all just go away?

    I am sorry this tires you, but some of us are very concerned about the torture, about the fact our government lied to us about what they knew, and about the fact our government chose to slander others as a means to cover those lies. I see no reason why this issue should not be pursued just because exposing the government's lies somehow bores you.

  6. Maybe you should spend less time hanging around pro-torture rightwingers. Decent Canadians are sickened by the cowrdly behaviour of the Harper government.

  7. some of us are very concerned about the torture

    Most of us aren't. Even Macleans' online poll – on a message board chock-full of raging moral authorities such as yourself – couldn't hit higher than 32% for "It's all Harper's fault." Guess how that kind of indifference plays out on a national scale?

  8. And the "online poll" at Rabble.ca ?

    I don't even know if they have one. But if they did, it would be just as credible.

  9. Spin it however you like, but next election you're going to be shocked at how many Canadians are apparently "indecent pro-torture right-wingers," from how little they'll seem to let this affect their voting intention.

  10. The only one we know for sure who wasn't interested was the delightful M. Chretien.

  11. Oh, online polling generally, absolutely. But my point is the radical disconnect between the incredibly vocal commenters who insist this is the Most Important Issue Ever, and, apparently, non-commenting readers. The echo chamber effect is perhaps leading some of you to assume more public outrage than actually exists.

  12. In the last most recent valid scientific poll – 70% of Canadians rejected turning over prisoners if there was a risk of torture. 55% wanted a public inquiry.. and 49% believed Colvin's testimony over 10% of those who thought the govt's talking point of his being flimsy evidence.

    Come back with a real poll results next time, Avr.

  13. No one will ever face criminal charges, least of all your personal political bugbears. Get that wish-fulfillment fantasy out of your head.

  14. I find it remarkable that Colvin, a minor intellignece official, sends a report to Ottawa and then sends another report on the same subject a week later because he "didn't get a response" to the first one and he and everyone assumes this is "evidence" that no one was doing anything. This guy obviously does not know how the system works. Officials in Ottawa had no responsibility to tell him what tehy were doing with the information and this is no evidence whatsoever that it was being "ignored". He has no credibility.

  15. Is not that I don't care if these people were torture,d of course I do, it's horrible! But so far I haven't heard anything that make it sound like this is some kind of huge cover up by Dr. Evil (PM Harper) and his gang, to me it sounds like they are going in circles, over and over, it is tiring to hear the same thing and I agree with Two Yen, to me Colvin has no credibility!

    And I am very proud of our troops, and this incredible sacrifice that they are making to bring freedom and democracy to Afghanistan, they are my heroes and I pray that they come safe and sound!

  16. Your general callousness theory seem only to work when you bind the torture situation to a partially related one. In this case you're saying; "In an election situation, Canadians won't care much about the torture files in Afghanistan." and in the comment thread above you're saying: "Canadians don't think Harper is entirely responsible about the torture files."