"Military secrecy necessary: Hillier"
A letter from the CDS to the Edmonton Journal, in response to this editorial of theirs. An earlier post of Babbling's on the subject is here.
posted by Mark, Ottawa at 3:09 p.m.
Monday, July 16, 2007
The Torch is a group weblog focusing on the Canadian military.
Contributors:
- Damian - Babbling Brooks
- Mark from Ottawa
- Paul Synnott - BBS
- The Monarchist
- The Phantom Observer
- Tony - Milnews.ca
Damian's Afghanistan Posts
- Welcome to the two-way range
- The winning percentage
- Tac Hel
- Compatriots
- On the boardwalk
- Patrol, pt.1 - headed to Double K
- Patrol, pt.2 - Dand District Centre
- Corrections: thankless and rewarding
- Canada/Afghanistan (and me)
- A little goes a long way
- Photo Album
The opinions expressed in each blog post at The Torch are those of the specific post's contributor, and should not be attributed to any other group, organization or individual with which any of the contributors is affiliated, including each other. Neither do others' comments to these posts represent the contributors' opinions. Furthermore, any links provided to other websites are for information purposes only, and don't imply any endorsement on the part of the contributors.
This website is not endorsed by the Department of National Defence, the Government of Canada, or any other group or organization.
LCol John McCrae
Maps
Afghanistan pol/topo
Afghanistan ethnolinguistic
SW Asia ethnolinguistic
Afghanistan ISAF RC & PRT
Kandahar districts
Previous Posts
- Afstan: Scott Taylor blows it on the "exit strateg...
- What it's like outside the wire in Afstan
- MND O'Connor interview on CFRA, Ottawa/CDS interview
- Afstan: First get your facts right
- First of Van Doos' Battle Group off to Afstan
- A little clarity
- IFF on the ground in Afghanistan
- Poles now operational in Afstan
- Afstan: Why we're losing the war...
- PRO PATRIA
2 Comments:
a MSM poll that can be supported
http://www.canada.com/windsorstar/index.html
What an odd letter. More than half of it simply quotes Elcock. And it doesn't even pretend to answer the question of how the withheld information would be dangerous.
I'd have thought that the people responsible for putting this kind of response out there - Public Affairs Officers, I assume? - could do better.
Post a Comment
<< Home