Where to begin...how about with the fact that an 18 month assignment to a senior position in Afghanistan makes him one of Canada's leading experts on that country? Or perhaps the fact that he clearly gets what this war is about: counter-insurgency. Or how about the fact that the Conservative government did change the prisoner transfer protocol--why would they do that if it would put them in sync with someone who supposedly hates the troops and wants the Taliban to win?

Obviously you are not a Canadian Friend at all, but rather someone who puts cheap partisan politics ahead of the safety of Canadian soldiers and the chances of achieving victory. Shame on you.

I know that Colvin's testimony is probably pretty boring for you, Balabu, given that it is not full of bile and hatred toward the political party that you want to blame for all evil in the universe, but you might do yourself the favour of trying to read it. If you do, you'll learn that Colvin is not taking a partisan position. Given your evident biases, you might even like the fact that he is mainly criticizing civil servants (sorry, let me translate that into your language for you: "Liberal stooges who bake cookies for the Taliban"). He also makes two interrelated points: that many of the people arrested were (according to Western intelligence agencies) not terrorists but simply people caught in the wrong place at the wrong time; and that as someone who believed in achieving victory in Afghanistan he was concerned that Canada was ignoring the maxim of US General Petraeus that if you lose the civilian population, you can't win the war. Stubbornly insisting that policies that the Conservatives themselves saw the need to change over two years ago were somehow brilliant strategy makes you look like you are a fool who actually wants to see Canadians get killed in an apocalyptic clash of civilizations.