32

‘The issues raised by the Richard Colvin affair are profound’


 

Twenty-three former ambassadors write in support of Richard Colvin.

The ex-heads of Canadian diplomatic missions say in a letter released to the media that they’re worried the treatment of Mr. Colvin will discourage diplomats from reporting frankly to Ottawa from their foreign postings…

“The Colvin affair risks creating a climate in which officers may be more inclined to report what they believe headquarters wants to hear, rather than facts and perceptions deemed unpalatable,” the ex-ambassadors say…

“A fundamental requirement of a foreign service officer is that he or she report on a given situation as observed or understood,” the former heads of mission said. “It is only in this way that any government can draw conclusions knowledgeably and make its considered decisions, even if at variance with the reports received.”


 

‘The issues raised by the Richard Colvin affair are profound’

  1. Why are they against our troops?

  2. C'mon Wherry! Why are you focusing on this non-issue (Who cares about whether some furriners got what was comin' to 'em?)

    Don't you know that Global Warming is a massive hoax??? Why is the MSM ignoring this issue of global importance???

    (Oh wait….nevermind…)

    http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/735695-

    • So the UN proves there is no problem with East Anglia's methods because it says so?

      And what is the basis of such a conclusion?
      OH right, the main source of the UN's data on climate change is …

      wait for it …

      East Anglia!

      Oh the circular logic some people are willing to indulge!

      • Whatever you say Looney Tunes…whatever you say.

        • OK so now you're defending yourself by saying i'm crazy.

          I think you skipped a few steps.
          Usually people provide the reasoning for why they came to a conclusion.

          If you think global warming is self evident and there's no need to discuss it i'm not at all sure why you bothed to post today.

          You've convinced nobody that global warming is real and that climate gate isn't a big deal.

          The only people who are goign to listen to circular arguements were already on your side. Those skeptical or opposed are utterly unconvinced by your display.

    • These aren't "furriners"; they are Canadians. It is interesting that the larger group, the Retired Heads of Mission Association, could not reach agreement on whether to endorse the letter. The concern by those who did sign related to what were perceived as personal attacks on Colvin even though some apparently raised questions about his handling of information. No comment was made on the accuracy of the information.

  3. C'mon Wherry! Why are you focusing on this non-issue (Who cares about whether some furriners got what was comin' to 'em?)

    Don't you know that Global Warming is a massive hoax??? Why is the MSM ignoring this issue of global importance???

    (Oh wait….nevermind…)

    http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/735695-

  4. Privileged members of the old boys' club that is the foreign service resent threats to their unquestioned influence! Film at 11!

    • Cynics grope for any available fallacious reasoning or smear they can to muddy the waters…no news here!

    • Do tell.. what would be the most helpful? Reports by our troops on the ground of detainees being passed into suspected torture and pulled back out again? No.. we already have that.
      I know.. instruments of torture and blood being found in prisoner's cells with prisoners claiming they'd been tortured therein. No.. we already have that too.

      Is there anything that could help his credibility?

      OH! I know! As soon as one of the prison guards Youtubes his tape of Canada transferring over a prisoner, them taking him to a cell, and then torturing him with a blow by blow description of exactly how it's torture.. that'd do it, right? Okay, okay.. probably not proof enough, after all, they could have edited the video, couldn't they?

    • Yeah, Robert Fowler was privileged to be kidnapped for his troubles, the elitist pansy. Spending a year as a guest of Al-Quaida was obviously the time of his life, so no wonder he's in support of a guy who questions the treatment of Al-Quaida's Taliban friends.

      But your credibility, avr, is top-notch!

      • What an odd passive agressive statement.

        One wonders what would happen if two people who were kidnapped had DIFFERENT opinions!

        Would your head explode?

        This reminds me so much of the whole "soldiers are always right" thing the Republicans were doing for awhile. Until the anti-war crowd smartened up and got soldiers of their own to oppose the war.

        I'm not sure if anyone expected better of you Jenn. I'm really not. But this is pretty low.

    • Seriously?

      How is it that everyone except the Conservatives who have the most to gain or the most to lose have self-serving interests?

      If anyone is resenful to their unquestioned influence, surely it has to be this government. Disgusting.

    • Now this is an example of circling the wagons.

  5. All taliban dupes eh, Harper/MacKay/Hillier/Gauthier?

  6. I wonder how long it'll take for the story to move from alleged govt negligence to govt suppression of dissenting FS officer? I suppose it's already here. A twoffer. This govt just can't help itself…"they're all against us'!! must be Harper's personal mantra.

  7. Money quote: "While criticism of his testimony was perfectly legitimate, aspersions cast on his personal integrity were not."

    • Hear hear. Let's not forget that foreign service officers dedicate their lives to Canada, no less than army or navy officers do. Every word the CPC has uttered to blacken Colvin's reputation is a hint of what they'd equally do to an army or navy officer who blew the whistle. They are against the very idea of public service and have only recently — after years of covering up the bravery of the CF in Afghanistan — started wrapping themselves in a feeble, US-inspired pro-CF jingoism. They're the mirror image of the NDP's knee-jerk anti-military sentiment.

    • Of course, the criticism being legitimate has no bearing on whether it was actually correct.

      • I suspect the criticism of Colvin's testimony was not only legitimate, but also mostly correct. His sweeping allegations, which seemed so explosive at first, have fizzled like wet gunpowder.

        Of course, the aspersions cast on Colvin personally were reprehensible and completely beyond the pale. The Tories richly deserve the spanking they received for their original ham-fisted "shoot the messenger" response.

  8. ''However, a group representing a far bigger pool of former ambassadors, the Retired Heads of Mission Association, was unable to reach a consensus on issuing such a statement…''

    Funny, Gar Pardy is the head of the Retired Heads of Mission Association,
    and he couldn't get the organization he heads, on board to sign this 'letter'…!

    But he did get Paul Durand, a Chretien appointee and
    John Noble, from International Affairs at ' Harvard 'University
    to come forward.

    • Maybe, but you voted for Jean Chretien.

      • Yes, I foolishly believed him and his Red Book, I was even willing to forgive them for the NEP,
        won't make that mistake again!

    • I suppose if the rest of them come out in support of the government on this issue you might have a point, however I would not take the fact that other diplomats did not sign the letter to be a sign of support for the government.

      Seems to me that most diplomats feel bound by the constraints of diplomacy and of their position, and feel they should not speak out against the Canadian government, in any circumstances. I am sure that continues while in retirement. That is why the fact some diplomats did speak out is so remarkable.

    • Good Lord, stop proving you can go lower than our worst expectation.

  9. not at all looney tunes…those who are skeptical are beyond reach.

    That was my point.

  10. Your point is wrong and contrary to the evidence provided by public polling on this issue.

    The ranks of skeptics are growing. And there is a great deal of uncertainty, so much so that only a mionrity on both sides have a fixed opinion. So obviously positions on the issue can be very fluid.

    Arguements for and against the existence of AGW can and do change minds.

    My point is that you're more interested in calling people names then make a convincing case for AGW. That's fine. Its just a rather odd waste of time.

    • Nobody is asking you to be impressed with other people's opinions.

      Just be realistic.

      With our political system 30% of people can form government, 40% a majority gov't.

      Seems to me like if you believe in AGW and want something to be done about it you actually try and make arguements in favour of it.

      Otherwise, as I said earlier, your initial statement seems like a strange waste of time.

  11. Hey, you forgot the Elvis numbers… and never mind GWB's popularity numbers (should have been negative after all the cr*p he rendered).

  12. Your point is wrong and contrary to the evidence provided by public polling on this issue.

    The ranks of skeptics are growing. And there is a great deal of uncertainty, so much so that only a mionrity on both sides have a fixed opinion. So obviously positions on the issue can be very fluid.

    Arguements for and against the existence of AGW can and do change minds.

    My point is that you're more interested in calling people names then make a convincing case for AGW. That's fine. Its just a rather odd waste of time.

  13. Perhaps the rest of the Retired Heads of Mission Association did not sign on with the Liberals, __because they are conflicted with in the insistance of the opps and media calling our Military and Government __'complicite in war crimes'….. which by any measure is far far worse than calling into doubt the sources and testimony of a diplomat.

Sign in to comment.