How rich, coming from Canada's thug media: "Don't waterboard the messenger"

In the context of Richard Colvin, the National Post has an editorial today entitled “Don't waterboard the messenger.”

What a hypocritical piece of advice and double standard we have here from the Editorial Board of the National Post.

Based on the National Post’s own waterboarding practices of the past, and those of Canadian journalist thugs at large, as they pile on, in true gang bang fashion without ever lifting a finger to determine whether the facts about which they write are even true, as evidenced by this comment from Carol Goar of the Toronto Star: “I didn't explore the possibility that [Flaherty] was lying [about tax leakaeg]. Perhaps I should have.”

Well, duh? Or are you being paid to turn a blind eye?

It’s too bad that the standards that the National Post think should apply to the thug Harper government don’t equally apply to its thuggish self or the rest of the Canadian media.

When Canadians like myself stood up against the patent lies and falsehoods of the Harper goon squad on the total and demonstrable hoax of tax leakage, and thereby defied the corporate order that governs this country (read: Power Corporation, BCE, the Banks, Manulife. Goldman Sachs, etc), this is the type of waterboarding treatment that I and others received from these thugs in the press:

“Before our seniors rush off with the thought that the income trust issue is a call to re-fight the Second World War, they should know that Fullard is employed by the Canadian Association of the 50 Plus (CARP) [a totally false and slanderous statement, designed to waterboard me in public]. CARP in recent years got into bed with investment firms selling income trust products to its members. If I were running CARP, I'd be fighting mad, too.” National Post December 7, 2006

Someone should encase income trust lobbyists in concrete and fling them off a bridge into deep water. On second thought, forget it; even that wouldn't stop the misguided creatures. Houdini-like, they would somehow break free and call for Jim Flaherty's head the moment their lips broke the surface. They are unstoppable and insatiable. They should be ignored.” Globe and Mail December 2006

“Needless to say, whatever one's views of the trust decision, vaporizing Brent Fullard would be a good idea, no matter what the occasion.” National Post October 27, 2007

“Earth to Income Trust investors: Don't blame Ottawa for your investing blunders. Your manufactured rage is disproportionate to the alleged offence. It's time to let it be.” November 25, 2006

“Will someone save me from Brent Fullard?” by Don Martin National Post October 1, 2008


Don't waterboard the messenger

National Post Published: Saturday, November 21, 2009

Mr. Colvin claims his reports were widely distributed. But top military and political figures deny any awareness of their contents. Unless we are to believe they are all lying, it would appear Mr. Colvin's reports didn't go as high as he believed. Defence Minister Peter MacKay has repeatedly stated that "there has not been a single, solitary proven allegation of abuse involving a transferred Taliban prisoner by Canadian Forces." The Tories also note that much of the information on which Mr. Colvin bases his charges came from secondary sources, of sometimes questionable motives and credibility.

Not least, the Conservatives also could draw attention to the fact that the Liberal assault on their position is being led by foreign affairs critic Bob Rae. Why, one might ask, is the file not being personally handled by that internationally recognized expert on human rights, Michael Ignatieff ? The obvious answer is that Mr. Ignatieff has in the past -- before his incarnation as a centre-left Canadian politician -- mused publicly about torture being an effective tool for extracting information from terrorists. This awkward fact tends to weaken his party's preferred air of self-righteousness.

Put all of these Tory talking points together, and they have a pretty good case. But Mr. MacKay undermines it by focusing on Mr. Colvin rather than the issue he raises, attacking the messenger rather than the message.

For instance, he criticizes Mr. Colvin for failing to raise his concerns first-hand with him when Mr. MacKay visited Afghanistan (as if it were the man's responsibility to confront elected politicians with his findings personally). In heated exchanges in the House of Commons, Mr. MacKay melodramatically portrayed Mr. Colvin as a Taliban stooge, willing to swallow without question claims from "people who throw acid in the faces of schoolchildren and who blow up buses of civilians in their own country."

Mr. Colvin is no stooge. He is a seasoned foreign service officer with 15 years of experience in Sri Lanka, Russia, the Palestinian territories and Afghanistan, who was promoted under the Tories to a position as senior intelligence officer in Washington, Canada's most important diplomatic station.

This is not a rogue diplomat peddling a personal agenda, or an ivory-tower bureaucrat selling utopian ideals from the safety of an Ottawa office. Right or wrong, Mr. Colvin is risking his career to speak openly about a matter of national importance. The Accountability Act -- one of Mr. Harper's proudest achievements -- specifically protects and encourages whistle-blowers, offering a $1,000 reward for "public-service employees who have the courage to expose wrongdoing in the workplace."

Mr. Colvin would appear to have a strong case for claiming that reward. Instead, he's been subject to a full frontal assault from a government that appears to lack enough confidence in its own actions to let them stand up to public scrutiny.