$1:
2nd part makes you wonder. People who play soccer with goatheads, rape wives and tell the Taliban where to plant IEDs are 'credible' but senior diplomats aren't?
I'm not getting that. Who's quoting 'people who play soccer with goats'? If I'm not mistaken some of Colvins 'proof' came from people he never met over the phone, and apparently even then it was ambiguous.
Senior diplomat? OK which one? The 'senior' one or his boss?
$1:
I'm sure the senior generals can sit there and say there's no proof.
Yeah but that's not what they said. Put the two testimony's together side by side and General Hiller seems much more credible frankly.
$1:
The Minister (Peter Mackay) admits there were concerns as far back as 2006. Nuff said.
No, that's not enough said....and,
$1:
They'll torture anyone soon as we're not looking.
that's not what he said.
Look you want to paint in all the vast gaps you can't see with whatever you like then go ahead. But you don't know. The 'warnings' at this point by all accounts, including Colvins (considering he can't specifically remember), are vauge at best. That's not a partisan statement. I think in any legal sense it's pretty fair.
I dunno. I guess I'm not understanding your point. My point was that the opposition has no problem yakking on with accusations that paint the entire country in a really poor light when the evidence clearly shows that Canada reacted any time there was actual evidence.