Amazing! I've never seen anything like this. The prime minister's press chief, is demanding an apology from the BBC, the BBC claims the government is trying to intimidate them.
"I find it incredible that people can report, based on one single, anonymous, uncorroborated source ... that the prime minister, the Cabinet, the intelligence agencies, people like myself, connived to persuade Parliament to send British forces into action on a lie," said Mr Campbell."Until the BBC acknowledges that's a lie, I will keep banging on and that correspondent's file will get thicker," said Mr Campbell.
-- At-a-glance: Campbell's evidence
The BBC for it's part is acusing the Government of waging a person vendetta against one of it's journalists:
"You will see that I do not accept the validity of your attacks on our journalism and on Andrew Gilligan in particular."We have to believe that you are conducting a personal vendetta against a particular journalist whose reports on a number of occasions have caused you discomfort."
-- BBC rebuts Downing Street Attack
Well keep it up Alistair! News in this evening shows that for the first time in 11 years, labour are trailing the conservatives in the opinion polls!
Has the tide finally turned?
Why not take a look at the following website: http://www.coxar.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
Alistair Campbell has become a clear and present danger to parliamentary democracy in the UK.
His over-use of mis-information and diversionary tactics have now become obvious to even the most uninterested in politics. The Labour Party will suffer as a result as time goes on.
The press seem to have sold out and fall for his tactics at every turn.
Whatever happened to good investigating journalism of the kind that exposed Watergate despite a Campbell-type campaign to halt the DA and the journalist by mis-information and pushing people by misuse of power.
Campbell must be exposed and sent to the purgatory that his sins deserve......
In the event it looks ssa if Alistair Campball has doen nothing wrong at all. He was perfectly entitled to defend himself before the Commons Committee and to do so fortcibly, particulally in the light odf the almost pathological hatred the Media has for him.It seems either Dr. Kelly lied or Gilligan lied; certainly Alistair Campbell did not lie
for amwu resolution
for amwu resolution
The rats are deserting a sinking ship
The rats are deserting a sinking ship
The rats are deserting a sinking ship
the rats are deserting a sinking ship
the rats are deserting a sinking ship
Alistair Campbell was perfectly correct and right to question the complete lack of journalistic ethics displayed by the BBC and that travesty of a journalist Gilligan. I've said for a long time the BBC (and in particular 'ghastly Gilligan') is totally biased in their 'reporting'.
I also find it totally repulsive that Gilligan downright lied about his 'source's' comments to grab a headline and recognition (and he certainly got that!!). The upshot is he contributed massively to Dr Kelly's death, not least with the despicable actions of revealing him as Susan Watt's source and briefing MP's b4 they questioned Kelly-HE IS A DISGRACE, HE SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO REPORT!!!!
What puzzles me about the Campbell/Gilligan/BBC/Government row is:
upon Dr Kelly's admission to his MOD line managers that he had spoken to Andrew Gilligan, why was Dr Kelly not charged immediately under the Official Secrets Act for revealing classified information?
Could it be because, in the Criminal Trial that would have followed, all the witnesses (including Tony Blair, Alistair Campbell and John Scarlett) would have been under oath to tell "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth"?
Have you seen this?
Alistair Campbell will be the new DG of the BBC
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/uk_politics/3441181.html
It would be wrong to describe Alistair Campbell as a Pig, I have more respect for a Pig
The most relevant comment I have read about the Alastair Campbell vs BBC row appeared in the Guardian's letters page on February 5, 2004 under the heading - The Official Secrets Act is to blame. It also partly answers my query as to why Dr Kelly wasn't charged under the Official Secrets Act (see above my comments of September 22, 2003):
"The source of the present controversy lies in the the effect that the 1989 Official Secrets Act has had on journalism. It was designed by the Thatcher government to stop people such as Clive Ponting ever revealing unpalatable secrets again. Section two encourages false or vague reporting. If a journalist works too well on a story involving an official secret, prosecution will inevitably follow. There is no public interest defence - because that is specifically forbidden by the Act.
In practice, this reduces responsible journalism to gutter-press output. If a reporter simply writes or says there is a rumour going about, or that a single anonymous person is the source of the story, prosecution is unlikely. It follows that the reporter serves the public interest better by publishing at this point of the development of the story. To go further would quickly make the entire story subjudice.
Andrew Gilligan was working on a story about an official secret, using contacts bound by the Act. Dr Kelly certainly had access to secret information in documentary form - and perhaps knew of others with access to secret information who might back up his story. But if Gilligan had firmed up the story by looking for such evidence or second witness statements, he would have been open to prosecution. So what he did was, in fact, the best way of serving the public interest.
Using a single source is now said to be the genesis of his mistake. But what alternative does the Official Secrets Act give? To bring the truth to the public, it has to be wrapped up as a rumour."
Peter Hill
BBC Current Affairs, 1969-99