Ahh, how I love living in a free country ...

This seems like a first,
how is the media handling it there?

The Guardian and The Mirror have put this 'gag' story on their front pages for Friday, though not the biggest story in either case. The Times has in in its top 10 stories on its website. The Independent does not appear to have covered it at all.

The BBC did have it on their main web page, but it's now dropped down to the Americas page. BBC Newsnight, which analyses 3 or 4 stories at the end of the day, ran it as their first item, spending about 15 minutes on it (including an interview with the loathsome PNACer Frank Gaffney, who accused Al Jazeera of working for the USA's enemies, and said that if Bush had thought of bombing the Qatar office, that was fine - what an evil POS).

BBC america news didn't play it in the states

If anyone ever doubted that conversation took place then this shoots a hole in those doubts and sinks them to the bottom of the Thames River.

Pants down and caught.

The Mirror said the memo turned up in May last year at the constituency office of the former Labour MP for Northampton South, Tony Clarke. Last week, Leo O'Connor, a former researcher for Mr Clarke, was charged with receiving a document under section 5 of the act. David Keogh, a former Foreign Office official seconded to the Cabinet Office, was charged last week with making a "damaging disclosure of a document relating to international relations". Mr Keogh, 49, is accused of sending the document to Mr O'Connor, 42, between April 16 and May 28 2004.

Mr Clarke said yesterday that Mr O'Connor "did the right thing" by drawing the document to his attention. Mr Clarke, an anti-war MP who lost his seat at the last election, returned the document to the government. "As well as an MP, I am a special constable," he said.

Both men were released on police bail last Thursday to appear at Bow Street magistrates court on November 29. When they were charged, newspapers reported that the memo contained a transcript of a discussion between Mr Blair and Mr Bush.

The conversation was understood to have taken place during a meeting in the US. It is believed to reveal that Mr Blair disagreed with Mr Bush about aspects of the Iraq war. There was widespread comment at the time that the British government was angry about US military tactics there, particularly in the city of Falluja.......

Why do they do things like this.:shrug: It simply confirms the truth of the accusation.

What next!

......David Keogh, a former Foreign Office official seconded to the Cabinet Office, was charged last week with making a "damaging disclosure of a document relating to international relations". Mr Keogh, 49, is accused of sending the document to Mr O'Connor, 42, between April 16 and May 28 2004.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/11/22/us.al.jazeera/index.html
U.S.: Al-Jazeera bomb story 'outlandish'
British paper: Blair talked Bush out of airstrike on network

Tuesday, November 22, 2005; Posted: 7:33 p.m. EST (00:33 GMT)


LONDON, England (CNN) -- The White House characterized as "outlandish" Tuesday a British newspaper report that President Bush once discussed bombing the headquarters of Arabic-language television network Al-Jazeera with Prime Minister Tony Blair.

Al-Jazeera, based in Qatar, called on the British government to confirm or deny the report, which appeared Tuesday in the Daily Mirror, a London tabloid.

The network has been a frequent target of U.S. criticism, and its facilities have been hit by U.S. bombs in Afghanistan and Iraq. Al-Jazeera said the Daily Mirror report would be "both shocking and worrisome" if true. (Watch whether Bush considered targeting the television network --1:42)

"It would cast serious doubts in regard to the U.S. administration's version of previous incidents involving Al-Jazeera's journalists and offices," the network said in a statement.

that someone has to be holding a copy just in case.

it would have to become availiable outside Britain.

The Guardian has been the subject of 'double-gagging orders' in the past

1. Publish a story that embarrasses the PM
2. UK government gets an injunction preventing further publication of details
3. Print a story about the injunction.
4. UK government gets an injunction preventing mention of the first injunction.
5. Eerie silence falls

It seems that 'The air of England is too free for a slave to breathe' but you can still be slung in jail for reporting the truth. Any newspaper in the UK is going to think twice about following up this story.

Yet another victory in the war aginst terror.

They've developed their own sources "close to the story"

There seems to be quite a bit of knowledge about what's in the memo floating about.

It's an excellent piece of reporting and well worth a read, at:

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/UK_Press_Gagged_by_Attorney_General_1123.html

I can only wonder why the UK government hasn't followed up with a second gagging order against the Mirror.
Perhaps it isn't explosive as the Guardian's story about British intellgence having a double agent within the 9/11 bombers circle.

I'll have a mooch around and see if I can find anything on it.

No info at all on my 'UK double-agent in 9/11 gang' premise
I did find lots of stuff on British,U.S. and Pakistani intelligence supporting Mujahedeen-type organisations in Afganistan,Bosnia and Grozny but nothing on the story I mentioned.
Quite a few mentions on conspiracy theory sites about Atif Ahmed, a man held for a short time by the British authorities and later released without charge.

around. They can refute the story all they want. The story is out there. Bush Brain exposed again.

I, for one, appreciate that.

Thank you, Ms. Volestrangler.

It's nice to be appreciated. :-)

...all over the world that way. Secrets about pols gone bad can't be contained. The truth will come out, whether Bush and Blair want it to or not.

"The attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, last night referred editors to newspaper reports yesterday that described the contents of a memo purporting to be at the centre of charges against two men under the secrets act.

"Under the front-page headline "Bush plot to bomb his ally", the Daily Mirror reported that the US president last year planned to attack the Arabic television station al-Jazeera, which has its headquarters in Doha, the capital of Qatar, where US and British bombers were based."

The Attorney General (Lord Goldsmith) by attacking now appears to confirm that the memo referred to does indeed include a discussion of such an attack plan.

Another sign that someone is losing it?

Flip flop support for Bush, destroy Bush?

BLAIR BUSH GUILTY AS CHARGED

This is why we are in Iraq today, because of the media whores that have always given Bush a break. Stories about WMDs were put on the front page of the WaPo and the NY Times. Stories debunking WMDs were buried in the back pages or not published at all.

The most interesting, breaking stories are almost always hidden in the inside pages and in the supplement sections, such as Business News or international reports.

Now, with so much being web-based and searchable by key words, it's harder for the editors to try to hide stories they don't like, as they used to.

I'm looking forward to the day when the MSM suits and assistant managing editor hacks have to go back and write news for a living. Down with the gatekeepers!

"Stories debunking WMDs were buried in the back pages or not published at all."

somebody's seriously nervous...

http://www.tomjoad.org/warheroes2.htm#means
This is not a state secret.

Controlling media was very much part of the plan.
Bush & co did not expect anyone to risk all and say no.

Also see this post, and if you can kick it, Charmaine Means will get the recognition she deserves.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5435195&mesg_id=5435195

makes it harder for people to say its not true. Plus it shows their true colors. We're fighting for freedom over there, eh? So where's all the freedom?

Having said that, Im still glad Blair talked Bush out of it. At least one of them has enough sense to know how bad this would have messed up our standing abroad. Liberators indeed!

to put Al-Jazeera off the air.

It is true! Bush is a raging lunatic!

Bush is truly a madman.

but most likely not, since people who voted for Bush are idiots.

It was about Bush wanting to Bomb Al Jazeera's headquarters in Qatar:

"Under the front-page headline "Bush plot to bomb his ally", the Daily Mirror reported that the US president last year planned to attack the Arabic television station al-Jazeera, which has its headquarters in Doha, the capital of Qatar, where US and British bombers were based."

The U.S. has previously attacked Al Jazeera journalists and stations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The British government wouldn't be reacting this strongly to a leaked memo if it didn't know the memo was genuine - a transcript of a meeting on April 16, 2004 when Blair talked Bush out of bombing Al Jazeera's HQ in Qatar.

There are better links and articles about this on the 'net right now.

Legal Gag on Bush/Blair War Row

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1648590,00.html

Legal gag on Bush-Blair war row

Richard Norton-Taylor
Wednesday November 23, 2005
The Guardian


The attorney general last night threatened newspapers with the Official Secrets Act if they revealed the contents of a document allegedly relating to a dispute between Tony Blair and George Bush over the conduct of military operations in Iraq.
It is believed to be the first time the Blair government has threatened newspapers in this way. Though it has obtained court injunctions against newspapers, the government has never prosecuted editors for publishing the contents of leaked documents, including highly sensitive ones about the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.

The attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, last night referred editors to newspaper reports yesterday that described the contents of a memo purporting to be at the centre of charges against two men under the secrets act.


snip

I posted this yesterday on DU:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1942365

Tue Nov-22-05 12:08 PM
Original message
U.K. charges official with leaking Blair memo (so, --there WAS a memo)





http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10153489/from/RS.3 /

U.K. charges official with leaking Blair memo

Document allegedly says PM dissuaded Bush push for attack on Al-Jazeera
NBC News and news services
Updated: 11:31 a.m. ET Nov. 22, 2005

LONDON - A civil servant has been charged under Britain’s Official Secrets Act for allegedly leaking a government memo that a newspaper said Tuesday suggested that Prime Minister Tony Blair persuaded President Bush not to bomb the Arab satellite station Al-Jazeera.

The Daily Mirror reported that Bush spoke of targeting Al-Jazeera’s headquarters in Doha, Qatar, when he met Blair at the White House on April 16, 2004. The Bush administration has regularly accused Al-Jazeera of being nothing more than a mouthpiece for anti-American sentiments.

The Daily Mirror attributed its information to unidentified sources. One source, said to be in the government, was quoted as saying that the alleged threat was “humorous, not serious,” but the newspaper quoted another source as saying that “Bush was deadly serious, as was Blair.”

Blair’s office declined to comment on the report, stressing it never discusses leaked documents......

hear anything today yet.

I hope it is not a one day story!!

isn't. I guess Al-Jazeera should only be reporting pro-American propaganda, according to Bush. I am convinced Bush is totally off his rocker.

Wanting to do that with another world leader. Moron. Isn't that the sort of stuff that President secretly order shadowy underlings to carry out?

What. A. Dumbass.

having the discussions where someone was TAKING MINUTES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Unbelievable

:eyes:

That's exactly what I'm thinking. I seriously doubt there's anything in those dated memos that jeopardizes security. Release them damn it and let the chips fall where they may!

They've pretty much confirmed by their actions that there is at least something to this memo about the Chimp pushing to bomb Al-Jazeera, so the horse has well and truly bolted and it makes little sense for them to try an suppress it now.

But I'm more curious what else in in it, maybe something about cooking evidence for Iraq? Illegal covert ops in other countries (Iran, Syria)? Plans to seize the oil fields? Speculation on my half, but it seems there is something more to it they dont want out.

There is only one consistent behavior from the White House, which is that anything they state for the record is untrue. Those bastards have taken Leo Strauss' crazy theories into the stratosphere. A thousand years from now, people will still be piecing the shattered crockery of the truth together into different shapes and saying, "this might be what happened."

Can't remember the page number, but on the left hand side, bottom of the page; very easy to miss.

Bush Spoke of Attacking Arab News Channel, British Tabloid Says


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/23/international/europe/23britain.html

stand by....

nominated

As an American, the closest I can get to British news is BBC America, which isn't very comprehensive. What's been going on over there lately as far as people speaking out against Blair?

which seems to be propagating around quite nicely :)

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-11-23T200730Z_01_SIB357452_RTRUKOC_0_US-BRITAIN-USA-JAZEERA.xml&archived=False

There's a big difference between this and previous "gagged" stories in the UK press (we've had a few..)

Previous "gagging orders" (like say the one relating to David Shayler's claims that MI6 tried to buy a hit on Gaddaffi from an Al Qaeda affiliated terrorist group) only injuncted the press not to print the story.

In the present case, newspapers are being threatened with actual prosecution under the Official Secrets Act.

As far as I am aware, this is something new. Even in the famous Spycatcher case of the mid-80's, during Thatcher's rule, there were no threats of prosecution (that I know of).

The previous policy of injunctions had gone hand-in-hand with the policy of not commenting on leaks, the idea being that to prosecute under the official secrets act would be tantamount to admitting that the information concerned was genuine (else it can't be an official secret).

The threat of prosecution in this case certainly seems like an admission that the memo is genuine, and is in circulation.

Hopefully, it will turn up on Cryptome in the next few weeks! :-)

Next year, I expect to see the UK heading down the free-press rankings towards the unenviable position of the US... :-/

We must demand that hearings are held by Congress into Bush's mental competency to be President. Imagine Bush with nuclear weapons at the ready!

Sounds like they're terrified of what is in that document, and I bet it's even worse than the bomb Al-Jazeera bombshell.

remarks about the assault on Fallujah. Goodness knows what Bush said about US aims when they targeted that city.

As for the Al Jazeera story - if it was a joke, the context would prove that and you would think Bush would want it published. But obviously the British Government (doubtless having their arms twisted by the White House) are determined to prevent this - the trial of leakers is likely to be in secret. So the context must prove that it was not a joke.

Shocking! Outrageous to suggest that our President would want to kill journalists... no, this sounds exactly like the doofus that's been trying to destroy the world for the last 5 years. Mean. Petty. Vindictive. Ignorant. Contemptuous of the law. Contemptuous of human life. Yes, that sounds EXACTLY like him.

Blair can't stop other European (or world) newspapers from publishing. They (Blair/Bush) are clearly scared.

http://news.google.com.hk/nwshp?hl=en&tab=wn&q=Bush%20Al%20Jazeera

Edit: first link didn't work