Monday, June 13, 2005

FAQ 5b. Could the 'edits' be accidental?

There is no doubt that some of the tapes were edited. Nor could it be an accident, as was asserted by the suicide note. The cuts are too many for that to be the case and they were made for consistent purposes. These things seem to be cut:
  1. Embarrassments to Grewal personally, such as things that make him sound vain (here), or whinging (here), or too calculating (his statement that he is 75% ready to make a deal, but that "the other 25% depends on what happens next" (p. 11).
  2. Anything that would contradict his earlier claims that he and his wife were offered a cabinet post and a senate seat, respectively (here);
  3. Politically inconvenient statements, such as Grewal's statement that even staunch conservatives in his riding were not keen to have an election (here), or that there were good things in the federal budget for BC (p. 4), or that recent news about the economy was reasonably good(p. 5).
  4. Things that reflect positively on Murphy or the Liberals. The public should not hear a Liberal praise an honest man for being an honest man here, or display his obvious affection for the Sikh community, or declare that the Prime Minister will not make certain kinds of rewards because he "doesn't think it's the right thing to do" (p. 6)
  5. Details that would encumber the narrative: the undergrowth must be cleared away so that the desired message comes through more clearly. A good example is the weird case of Paul from Nova Scotia or the tedious rituals of saying good-bye (pp. 15-16)
Given this pattern, any suggestion that the corruption was accidental is, frankly, ludicrous.

(To see for yourself the extent of the editing, and to read for yourself what was edited out, see the slide show comparing the transcripts of the edited May 31st transcript of the tape with the one released June 5.)

Return to the FAQ


Post a Comment

<< Home