Beyond The Commons

 Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

'I would like to have the opportunity to appear before the Committee'

by Aaron Wherry on Monday, November 23, 2009 3:31pm - 8 Comments

David Mulroney writes a letter (pdf file) to the special committee on Afghanistan.

Tags: , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
  • http://intensedebate.com/people/psiclone psiclone

    cool

    • wilson

      Except that the committee will not allow himto testify until 'after' some requested documents are tabled. by Dec 4(?)
      which is an impossibility.
      Cons say, let Mulroney testify, he can come back if they are not satisfied after doc are tabled,
      so far, committee says no.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

    Shorter translation:

    "I want to help my former Conservative colleagues out of the mess I and they find themselves in" ( he was the former deputy minister of the Afghanistan Task Force, to Conservative MP Rick Casson).

    Anything he says should be taken with a grain of salt.. and the opposition MP's on the Committee should give him tough questioning.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/psiclone psiclone

      so I see – Colvin truth Mulroney liar eh?

      • Luke

        Why would Colvin to lie?

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/Scott_Tribe Scott_Tribe

          Exactly. He's no reason to do so – particularly when he's the guy in charge of intelligence at the Canadian Embassy in the US.

          On a sidenote, might the Conservatives be trying to get him to testify ASAP so they can avoid a spectacle while Harper is traveling to China?

          • wilson

            Colvin smeared Mulroneys reputation,
            I doubt China is formost on his mind.

      • wilson

        Colvin = truth,
        2 Ministers, 3 Generals, a PM and multiple crown witnesses = liars

        Starting to sound like a repeat of the Suaad case?

Previous

Next

From Macleans