A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

So let me get this straight..

We paid John Manley 1400$/day and the other panelists 1000$/day (admittedly they didn’t do this job 5 days/week) to produce a report that was almost identical to what Mr. Manley already had written in October of 2007, with only minor changes to it so as to not overly criticize the Karzai government?

As Kady O’Malley says at her blogsite at Macleans, “it does raise the question of whether Manley had already made up his mind long before he took the job.”

I think the question has already been answered, Ms. O’Malley. Many of us long suspected that Manley was picked to be the head of a hand-picked panel to ensure Harper got a report from a panel he would paint as “non-partisan” in order to squelch attacks from the opposition parties – all this does is confirm many of our suspicions.

Hat-tip to Scott Ross for finding Manley’s original policy paper in October when he was a private citizen and comparing it to the Manley Report released yesterday and finding this out. That’s good blogger investigative work there (and may I say, good journalistic investigative work there).

Afterthought after posting this: I know Ms. O’Malley is doing a good job at following up Scott Ross’s report (and doing it for a national high-profile magazine like Macleans gets it out in the public spotlight) but I wonder if she or any of her journalistic brethren have asked Mr. Manley about the very curious similarities between his October policy paper and this report (and also the noticeable changes as Kady pointed out at her blogpostings).

3 comments to So let me get this straight..

  • Let’s see who we have on the panel here

    – Mulroney’s ambassador to the US

    – Mulroney’s minister of energy, mines and resources

    – Mulroney’s top staff member, appointed CEO of CN, privatized it, made a killing on NAFTA

    – Senior advisor to the Council of the Americas

    – Chair of an independent task force of the Council on Foreign Relations; also, the guy who got us into Afghanistan in the first place

    The task force that I was talking about, it’s one of the main architects behind the SPP (as is the Council of the Americas)

    The question is: did Harper loft this one over the plate for US batters or was he bent-ninety when "appointing" this panel

  • Blue Magic

    Watching the liberal party go far left is sad.

    You guys should have read the report before you went into wackoville going after Manly.

    Or having your candidate for central nova (and guess blogger) Liz May going on about the crusade and what not. 

    My has the liberal party fallen.  There was so much in this report for liberals to wigle, and to go after Harper and what do you guys do. 

    Read 15 pages then shoot the messager.  Amature hour in the liberal party. sad.

  • Our own Victor Wong debunked and thrashed this nonsense:

    If you’re a partisan confronted with evidence that could deflect your cause, a common tactical response is to try and discredit that evidence — usually by discrediting the provider of same. A Liblogger called The Scott Ross is attempting to do just that with John Manley’s report on Afghanistan.

    A common tactic indeed. Despite a variety of opinion from sources on both the left and right sides of the journalistic spectrum, Liberal bloggers en masse have called the findings to be little more than a work of art commissioned by Stephen Harper. The self-plagiarized accusation started early today, and was a parroted parody throughout the day. The problem is that the accusation is groundless:

    What’s missing here is context. Page 4 of the Manley Report comes from the Chairman’s Foreword, and is meant as a generalization; the Panel input is unnecessary here, as it’s the Chairman expressing his own thoughts. Page 12 of the Policy Options article happens to be the last page of the article, and is also part of a generalization. So what we have here are the same idea, from the same person, appearing in two very different places in two different reports, serving two different purposes. Plagiarism? Not likely.
    It’s incredible that partisan Liberals have denigrated the efforts of own of their own, just because he happens to have endorsed something which Stephen Harper agrees with. John Manley cannot be held responsible for the foreword from the Chairman of the Panel, and not the Panel itself.

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.