Army case leaks to Daily Mail but stays secret

The Mail has repeated a story from the Sunday Mirror.

Where could the leak come from? Is it possible the army would want these views to be known? A report exists but will not be published. Apparently it has been decided that all documents will remain secret.

What is strange is that this follows the discussion on how secret the hearings should be. So nothing is final.

OhmyNews story now published

Links here

Includes a brief section on the Al Jazeera memo. why was there a prosecution under the Official Secrets Act in this case but no move on the publication of the Manning memo. Would this change if UK media showed a bit more interest?

Manning Memo story for OhmyNews

I have sent in a story for OhmyNews, not yet published as of Monday morning. i hope it will be edited ahead of the Wednesday debate in UK parliament.

My claim at a news angle is that the Observer has published the story. A memo of a conversation including Bush and Blair seems to show that the facts were shifted to fit a decision already made to start a war. This is what many people think already but not the sort of thing within the scope of the enquiry recently announced by Brown.

So far a Google search finds only a blog as a follow up from Sunday print publication. David Swanson is kind enough to say that this is another sign of the UK being a few steps ahead of on news. However, according to the Wikipedia the New York Times reported this memo in 2006. So the publication in one UK newspaper three years later is not exactly rushing things.

Very Bad News

Apologies for not updating this for a while. It is never good to relax or so it seems.

The Froomkin blog is about to be terminated. Too many people like me assuming that all is not too disturbing.

Hope something else happens.

Nothing against the current President, but should all critique just come to an end on trust? Confidence levels in the official White house journalists? Well what do you think?

Exceptionalism

The BBC seems to have reduced reporting on remarks by Sarah Palin, but I found the Youtube/ AP clip so now know about the "exceptionalism" claims.



Recent discussion in the guardian as printed in the UK has covered whether people outside the USA should be commenting on the election. See Jonathan Freedland for example.

What strikes me most is that the discussion about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is still fairly limited in the UK. This is something to come back to.

But meanwhile, this "exceptionalism" is something to think about.

More on the Official Secrets Act

Here is an explanation of why the Al Jazeera case was a success for the prosecution.

The only real difference was that in the case of Keogh and O'Connor the officials who wanted the prosecution were prepared to testify, as was the prime minister's foreign policy advisor. With Pasquill, the embarrassment and vindictive nature of the trial was simply too much.

Also the Foreign Secretary, then Margaret Beckett, was prepared to sign statements about national security.

septicisle also points out that

It's also not the only trial upcoming under the OSA: Thomas Lund-Lack, who leaked a Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre report to the Sunday Times is also facing similar charges. The line between where investigative journalism and the public interest ends and justified government secrecy lies is an incredibly fine one, and it's not going to be decided through cases like this but through a review of the OSA itself, something that is long overdue.

JURIST not bound by UK law

The JURIST, based at a USA university, is not afraid or reporting that may not be exactly welcome in the White House

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/01/uk-civil-servant-cleared-in-rendition.php

However UK reports of the recent case fail to mention Al Jazeera.

Maybe I have this wrong. Was there a court hearing about the original ruling or what? Either way I can't find any UK reporting linking to the Daily Mirror story.

Somehow the UK Foreign Office is more concerned not to be critical of Bush than people in the USA.

New topic on Guardian Talk

The Guardian has deleted my original topic on Al Jazeera. It is true that not much happened. No new posts for a while. I guess this is part of the general effect of Blair not being around so much. Brown is not as obvious in his support of Bush, but the war continues.

I have started a new topic and also commented on a recent opinion from Polly Toynbee

You should read the Polly Toynbee text first but I am not sure about copying it. My comment below

It is still striking for me that Polly Toynbee rarely mentions the Iraq war and the public opposition to the original decision and the feeling of distrust around presentation and reporting.

I have started a topic over on Talk - Politics - Westminster etc

A previous topic, now deleted. was on the Al Jazeera memo trial.

Just in case someone missed the reports,

The Daily Mirror reported that there may be a memo about a possible talk between Bush and Blair about Al Jazeera.

Two people were tried under the Official Secrets Act. Much of the trial was held in secret. Peter Kilfoyle MP was not prosecuted although he made various statements based on the alleged contents of the memo.

Legal restrictions limit the extent to which UK media can report the trial and use the words "Al Jazeera" in the same story.

David Blunkett told Channel 4 when promoting his biography that the UK cabinet did discuss "taking out" Al Jazeera. As far as I know no UK media have tried to follow this up with further questions.

In case you think I am off topic, the generals do have a case. There are two very expensive wars happening. The people who still join the Labour Party may have expected Harriet Harman to say something about Iraq after the election. Did I miss it?

How did these wars start?
How was the case for them presented?
How was it reported?

Trust in politics? Just ignoring Iraq is not going to get anywhere.