There has been little other business on Parliament Hill since Richard Colvin's explosive testimony last week.
A senior intelligence officer at Canada’s embassy in Washington, Mr. Colvin told MPs that all captives Canadian soldiers transferred to local authorities ended up being tortured – even though many were likely innocent. He said he started red-flagging concerns for senior officials in Ottawa as far back as May 2006 – a year before the Conservatives acted on detainees.
Ever since, the Harper government has been trying to undermine the whistleblower's credibility as pressure builds to hold a public inquiry into the matter.
How do you read the situation? Is Mr. Colvin out of line? Are the Conservatives playing fair in this matter?
Comments
All comments require a name and email address. You may also choose to log-in using your preferred social network or register with Disqus, the software we use for our commenting system. Join the conversation, but keep it clean, stay on the topic and be brief.
Read comments policy.
comments powered by Disqus