Al-Jazeera calls for No 10 talks

[bigfootedfred]

The head of al-Jazeera is delivering a letter to Tony Blair demanding the facts on reports that President Bush suggested bombing the Arab TV station.

He wants a memo published which is alleged to show Tony Blair dissuaded President Bush from bombing its HQ.

Last week the Daily Mirror reported what it said was the contents of a memo showing Mr Blair had talked the US President out of the attack last year.

Wadah Khanfar is calling for the facts to be made public and urgent talks.


We demand a proper explanation and we would like to know the facts about this letter
Wadah Khanfar
Al-Jazeera head

Attorney General Lord Goldsmith has warned newspaper editors against publication, citing the Official Secrets Act.

According to press reports, the memo includes a transcript record of Mr Blair attempting in April 2004 to persuade Mr Bush not to bomb al-Jazeera's HQ in Qatar.

Qatar is an ally of the US and was the location of US military headquarters during the Iraq war.

The White House dismissed reports of the conversation as "outlandish", but US officials have openly accused al-Jazeera of being a mouthpiece for al-Qaeda.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today Programme, Mr Khanfar said: "Al- Jazeera is in the foremost of free form and democracy in the Arab world and therefore this news that we have heard is very concerning.

"So we demand a proper explanation and we would like to know the facts about this letter."

Political embarrassment

He said the matter was very important and that it concerned not only al-Jazeera but journalists across the world.

"We need to know if this discussion has taken place or not...if this document exists or not.

"By banning this document from being published it does cast a lot of concerns about this issue.

"When we are talking about bombing a TV station like that I think it is of historical value to know what's happened."

He said al-Jazeera had also asked the White House for an explanation.

Downing Street said on Friday that it was quite happy to talk to al-Jazeera as it was to other broadcasters.

Clarifying his position, Lord Goldsmith said he had not been seeking to gag newspapers and had instead been urging them to take legal advice.

"I am acting in my independent role, this is not the Government acting ... it is me acting in my independent role to protect the administration of justice, because there is a live case going on at the moment which mustn't be prejudiced, and secondly to protect the law."

'Deliberately targeted'

Cabinet Office civil servant David Keogh has been charged under the Official Secrets Act of passing the memo to former Labour MP Tony Clarke's researcher Leo O'Connor.

Both men are due to appear at Bow Street Magistrates Court next week.

Last week Labour MP and former defence minister Peter Kilfoyle tabled a Commons motion calling for the memo to be made public.

He accused ministers of using the Official Secrets Act to save political embarrassment rather than protect national security as it is intended.

Mutual suspicion

Lord Goldsmith also denied the Act was being used to prevent political embarrassment.

"It is not being used to save the embarrassment of a politician. That is completely not the case at all."

He also refused to confirm the contents of the memo.

BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner says this latest row follows a history of tension and mutual suspicion between al-Jazeera and the US administration.

Many of al-Jazeera's employees have long been privately convinced that their offices in Kabul and Baghdad were deliberately targeted by the Pentagon in 2001 and 2003 respectively.

source

surely if there was nothing to hide the'd publish the memo?

true or not, the current policy of "say nothing" is just rousing suspicion.

[Tom Paine]

Bloody hell! Goldsmith and the rest are being fools; publication could not be more damaging than confirmation through nonpublication; the second leads to worst-things being thought.

[Prince Kassad]

Bloody hell!...

You know, your'e the first Brit I've heard say that outside of a movie! Of course, I've never been to Britain...

Okay, that was completely random... back on topic.

I really don't care what hot air Al Jazeera is blowing at the moment, so I'm not going to get concerned enough to actually think about them.

[Tom Paine]

I really don't care what hot air Al Jazeera is blowing at the moment, so I'm not going to get concerned enough to actually think about them.

The government has managed to actually confirm it by nonrelease of the memo and threatening papers who publish anything about it with legal action... so it isn't just hot air.

[Prince Kassad]

The government has managed to actually confirm it by nonrelease of the memo and threatening papers who publish anything about it with legal action... so it isn't just hot air.

If I took the government that seriously... I would wet my pants every time they changed the color coded emergency system. "Indigo alert - Oh my God! The terrorists are everywhere!"

[Tom Paine]

If I took the government that seriously... I would wet my pants every time they changed the color coded emergency system. "Indigo alert - Oh my God! The terrorists are everywhere!"

Difference being this is them covering their asses after being accused of something. Its a sign the British government tends to give, along with calling judicial enquiries which create whitewash.

[Farnan]

Maybe its a distraction? Maybe your supposed to speculate on this document distracting you from other documents?

[Tom Paine]

That's a) cynical (which I like) and b) a little wierd; as I say, the nonpublication also leads to such speculation, which leads to speculation on those other douments... and the manifold speculation is damaging.

[Farnan]

Just like Area 61 in the US, the more people talk about something with noing what it is, the more they come up with preposturious ideas which serve two purposes:

1. It distracts people from what is really hidden.
2. As the claims get more spectacular people stop taking it seriously and the only people that start to care are the conspiracy theorists.
Sure it may cause short term damage, but may help in the long-term.

Non-Cynical attitude: Maybe it includes classified intellegence.

[Tom Paine]

Just like Area 61 in the US, the more people talk about something with noing what it is, the more they come up with preposturious ideas which serve two purposes:

1. It distracts people from what is really hidden.
2. As the claims get more spectacular people stop taking it seriously and the only people that start to care are the conspiracy theorists.
Sure it may cause short term damage, but may help in the long-term.

1. Only a little, and only sometimes.
2. See 1. And short-trm damage can be enough, especially for an administration like this one where trust is almost gone anyway.

Non-Cynical attitude: Maybe it includes classified intellegence.

Unlikely, really; and surely they could just say that rather than all the cloak-and-dagger stuff?

[Farnan]

1. Only a little, and only sometimes.

But then again, I believe in Watergate was a distraction, 18 minutes of a tape was "accidently" deleted. Also, with the Area 61 example the US military can test anywhere else in the country and no one will no one will notice because people are fixiated on Area 61. Since nothing illegal is likely in this document, maybe a Blair is using it to distract the media from a bigger scandle? (I know its strange to see me cynical, but I just outright can't truly trust politicians)

Again, there may be a perfectly good reason to keep the memo secret.

(note: I am not a conspiracy theorists and don't believe in a world or government conspiracies to take over the world, I just think politicians are smarter and slyer than we think.)

[bigfootedfred]

Im sorry but this is so damn suicpisous.

And true or not, how they are going about at the moment,...well conspiracy thoerists unite.
thats possible, as another poster said. an attempt to confuse everyone enoguh so that real issue is knever known propley.

i rekon within a month this will have become about somthing else, and most will have forgotten the orginal reasons.
Or in worst case scenario.....well im sure you could imagine what would happen if we found out some of the things we've been hearing about, we're actully true....well, you can proably imagine what would happen then.


i think ive come to a better understanding of tony bliar.
i think i know why he wanted britian in iraq with hte US.
i alos get the feeling he knows in of some sort of plan, and he's placing britains bets, in the winning side.
but its not right.

[genghis khan]

Just like Area 61 in the US, the more people talk about something with noing what it is, the more they come up with preposturious ideas which serve two purposes:

1. It distracts people from what is really hidden.
2. As the claims get more spectacular people stop taking it seriously and the only people that start to care are the conspiracy theorists.
Sure it may cause short term damage, but may help in the long-term.

Non-Cynical attitude: Maybe it includes classified intellegence.

I am sorry I couldnt resist. I was laughing when I read 'Area 61'. I think you mean 'Area 51'.

Not trying to nitpick but the foul-up was pretty funny, to me anyway.

[Tom Paine]

Very suspicious. I want a judicial enquiry, except I can guess what the findings would be.

But t be honest with the current government, transparency is off the agenda. Well off it.

[PacSubCom]

So the press knows all about it but is not allowed to publish? Fascinating, the workings journalism.

If everybody had it black on white, THIS would be bad. As long as people are guessing, one can deny. And you enjoy the benefit of the doubt: "Ah, this can't be, he is such a good-hearted, god-fearing guy, now isn't he?"

[bigfootedfred]

"When we are talking about bombing a TV station like that I think it is of historical value to know what's happened."

/\

we need the facts.
now


also

He said al-Jazeera had also asked the White House for an explanation.

that was pointless huh?

do we in the uk only speak to "chosen press"?

what the hell is going on.


We have to join with china, and the rest of europe. a second power block would stablise this. ..otherwise..

[Rustynail]

Kind of hard to release a memo if it does not exist...

[Tom Paine]

Kind of hard to release a memo if it does not exist...

Except the memo does exist; it hs been passed around a little, and is being suppressed under the Official Secrets Act.

Cabinet Office civil servant David Keogh has been charged under the Official Secrets Act of passing the memo to former Labour MP Tony Clarke's researcher Leo O'Connor

[Erik]

So the press knows all about it but is not allowed to publish? Fascinating, the workings journalism.

What are they going to do against it?
Bomb the Guardians HQ?

Except the memo does exist; it hs been passed around a little, and is being suppressed under the Official Secrets Act.

Yes, and this makes is suspicious to me.
By keeping it's content a secret they are hurting their relationship with the Islamic world.
I see no reason to keep it secret unless it contained something that would hurt those relationships even worst.

In my country parliament would have DEMANDED to know it's content.
That is the British parliament going to do?

Many of al-Jazeera's employees have long been privately convinced that their offices in Kabul and Baghdad were deliberately targeted by the Pentagon in 2001 and 2003 respectively.

There has never been an investigation into those bombings.
This smells fishy to me too.
If they realy were accidents they would at least have given an explanation.

[Tom Paine]

What are they going to do against it?
Bomb the Guardians HQ?

How about lock up journos or sue the paper and charge it under the Official Secrets Act, and end up causing it to fold?

Yes, and this makes is suspicious to me.
By keeping it's content a secret they are hurting their relationship with the Islamic world.
I see no reason to keep it secret unless it contained something that would hurt those relationships even worst.

In my country parliament would have DEMANDED to know it's content.
That is the British parliament going to do?

British Parliament might try, but it might not,. Its not like its the proposal to bomb the BBC, and its not like it was a British proposal.