| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
![]() Impeach George Bush Who Outed David Kelly Downing Street, that's who. Downing Street's involvement in the "outing" of David Kelly was today confirmed after it emerged that Tony Blair's official spokesmen helped redraft the initial press statement about the scientist's meeting with BBC reporter Andrew Gilligan. Source: Guardian.co.uk, 2003-09-18 Candidate: David Kelly Pam Teare, the head of press at the Ministry of Defence, told the Hutton inquiry she was called to a meeting on July 8 to discuss the draft with the prime minister's two official spokesmen, Tom Kelly and Godric Smith. Martin Howard, the MoD's deputy chief of intelligence, and Sir Kevin Tebbit, the MoD's permanent secretary, were also at the meeting. The meeting was held the day after Dr Kelly was read "the riot act" for having what the MoD considered was an unauthorised meeting with the BBC journalist who had sparked the bitter war or words between the corporation and the government. Ms Teare revelations that Mr Blair's two spokesmen were consulted is further evidence of Downing Street's direct involvement in the decision to put Dr Kelly's name in the public domain. The press statement was released at teatime on July 8, hours after the BBC director general, Greg Dyke, had called for a truce in a row that was already beginning to bore the public. Its timing - just five minutes before the BBC and ITV's 6pm news bulletins - meant it was guaranteed the top slot in the running order, pushing a potentially more damaging story about Tony Blair into second place. The revelation will also raise questions about the involvement of Alastair Campbell, who appears before the inquiry tomorrow, in the decision to make Dr Kelly's name public. The MoD press release did not identify Dr Kelly, but narrowed Gilligan's suspected source down significantly, by announcing where he worked. The scientist's name became public two days later. The Hutton inquiry today heard the press release was drafted four days before amid fears that Dr Kelly's name was beginning to leak. Ms Teare only learnt herself that day that Dr Kelly had written a letter to Sir Kevin admitting he had met Gilligan. She told the Hutton inquiry that the MoD feared the story would leak to the press. This was partly because one of Dr Kelly's colleagues had recognised comments made by Gilligan to the foreign affairs select committee as being the "sort of thing" Dr Kelly would say. The fact that Dr Kelly had admitted he had several contacts in the media also led the MoD press office to think it would not be long before journalists learned he had come forward. Tom Baldwin, associate editor of the Times, seemed to be coming close to identifying him on July 5 when he wrote that Gilligan's source was probably a weapons of mass destruction expert who had been in Iraq, Ms Teare told the inquiry. "The purpose of this statement was not to make an announcement but in case some of this story got into the public domain we would have something to offer. It was not meant for proactive use," she said. Lord Hutton at this point intervened to ask Ms Teare: "You said there was concern that Dr Kelly's name might leak out. Are you able to say from what source or sources did you think that the name might leak?" Ms Teare replied: "It was a combination of things - the fact that a colleague had identified some of Dr Kelly's remarks... so already in the public domain there were people out there who were speculating. "He had volunteered to us he was a regular contact amongst a circle of journalists. In my view at that time it heightened my concern that Dr Kelly's name could be emerging... that there was interest in the journalistic community in identifying Andrew Gilligan's source and they might think it was Dr Kelly." Ms Teare told the inquiry she first became aware of Dr Kelly's identity in the late afternoon of July 4 when she was told by the MoD's chief press officer, Kate Wilson, who was told in turn by the department's permanent secretary, Sir Kevin Tebbit. "She told me that he came forward and admitted that he had had unauthorised contact with the media namely with Andrew Gilligan, that the matter of 45 minutes had cropped up and also that Dr Kelly had said that he had had contact with over a number of years quite a broad range of journalists. "She also said that he had decided to come forward because a friend of his had recognised some of the comments that Andrew Gilligan had made to the source as being the sort of comment that Dr Kelly might make. "She certainly said to me that Dr Kelly felt he was not the source of the story. "She told me that during the discussions that had been had in the permanent secretary's office all parties were concerned that this information might leak into the public domain over the weekend and because of that a contingent press line had been agreed for us if it was required." Ms Teare also revealed that Andrew Gilligan had not phoned the MoD to get his story that was broadcast on May 29 confirmed or denied. She said she was "surprised" to hear on a much later broadcast on June 28 when the Today programme said it had checked the story with the MoD beforehand. She was away at the time, but her chief press officer Kate Wilson had told her it was not true that Gilligan had checked the story. Ms Teare said she was "surprised at the categorical way the presenter had said that it had been checked with the MoD because I certainly was not aware of it". Add a comment to this Message in our Forums. While you're at it, check out our forums too! User Originated Comments: From: Yu Goetzler 1999-11-30 00:00:00 cannot trust the media. |
|
Related News
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() owned by TheTIP. [ Skip Next | Next | Random Site | List Sites |Previous ] NEWS | ACTION | RESULTS | POLLS | MEMBERS | SEARCH |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. |
Thetip.org assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions in these materials. Thetip.org makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Further, Thetip.org cannot edit, control, review for truth or accuracy, or screen for defamation or obscenity any content provided to the Website by a third party through postings, uploaded files, or any other form of communication, nor can Thetip.org ensure prompt removal of defamatory, obscene, inappropriate or unlawful content after transmission. Any such third party postings, files or other communications do not necessarily represent the opinions, beliefs, or positions of Thetip.org. Thetip.org makes no, and expressly disclaims any, representations or warranties, express or implied, regarding the Website, including, without limitation, any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. Thetip.org makes no, and expressly disclaims any, warranties, express or implied, regarding the correctness, accuracy, completeness, timeliness, and reliability of the text, graphics, links to other sites and any other items accessed from or via this Website or the Internet, or that the services will be uninterrupted, error-free or free of viruses or other harmful components. Under no circumstances shall Thetip.org, its affiliates, or any of their respective partners, officers, directors, employees, agents or representatives be liable for any damages, whether direct, indirect, special or consequential damages for lost revenues, lost profits, or otherwise, arising from or in connection with this Website, the materials contained herein, or the Internet generally. |