Guardian on Manningham Buller 39

There is a good article in the Guardian by Vikram Dodd on Eliza Manningham Buller’s professed ignorance. Some kind people in the comments thread have pointed out that my testimony and documentary evidence directly contradicts Manningham Buller.

Some commenters then bemoaned the fact that the Guardian no longer invites me to write on these issues, which provoked a response from Matt Seaton of the Guardian that it is I who refuses to write for them. That is untrue and I have posted this comment, which I repeat here as the dreaded moderators will probably get it.

It is certainly true that I formally warned in a diplomatic telegram as early as November 2002 that we were receiving intelligence from torture from the CIA, and this was illegal. I was called back to a meeting in March 2003 to be told it was legal and policy, as decided by Jack Straw. Documents on my webiste.

Matt, for the record I should be delighted to write for Guardian cif. Sadly the Michael White Jack Straw fan club at the Guardian have blackballed me – as I am sure you know.

I remain attracted to the idea – which I believe genuinely ought to work – of taking the trustees of the C P Scott trust to court for acting ultra vires. The trust stipulates that the Guardian must support liberal values. But New Labour have been the most illiberal government since Castlereagh, and the Guardian has cheerled for them. It would be a wonderful opportunity for a discussion in a court of law of New Labour’s attacks on civil liberties and the legality of New Labour’s wars.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

39 thoughts on “Guardian on Manningham Buller

1 2
  • Anonymous

    Best to get on an established TV channel like Aljazeera or Russia Today. Setting up your own channel and getting it known to the masses would cost a fortune.

    Sadly I doubt though if the masses give a hoot, they’re more interested in the nocturnal antics of footballers, pop singers and golf players.


    As a non Guardian reader I don’t particularly care what they publish as I won’t pay for it. Not true for the BBC though. Why are we still paying for such a costly biased dinosaur in allegedly 21st century free market ecconomy?

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Yes, Richard, good point. Exact same dynamic applies to the (fiction) book world – but that’s my hobby-horse, and I won’t ride it today!

  • ingo

    Sorry anno, but melanie Phillips stance on so many issues, whether its her apologetics towards Israels rightwing apartheid excesses, or an expensive ludicrous and moralistic prohibition we can not afford anymore, it has left her in a camp I will not frequent.

    Teenage pregnancies have been ‘fostered’ under consequetive Governments, i.e. get pregnant and you will be looked after, to lament about it is too late, action is required and again, Holland shows the way, but I regret to inform you that melanie Phillips is not looking for solutions to societies problems, its her solutions that matter more.

    That said, we will have to disagree on this friend of Israel.

  • Tom L

    A bit off topic, but I am starting to distrust even the guardian.

    In a column the other day on US debt, in the comments section some people said they couldn’t understand, so I posted a reply with some links to zero, an excellent financial blog worth bookmarking which like Craig, attempts to see through the smoke and mirrors and report the truth.

    These links were taken down within an hour

    One titled

    “Is the federal reserve insolvent?”

    and another

    “The Fastest Growing Export of the Western Banking Industry is Fraud”

  • Stephen

    Craig, I see the author of that piece came back to you in the comments inviting you to contribute to CiF. Can I suggest that you contribute a piece strongly critical of the Guardian for its _ultra vires_ illiberalism. Paste it on your blog as well and let’s see if the Guardian posts it. It would be an interesting test of whether the Guardian can take criticism of the media, including itself. Do it!

    Best Wishes,


  • Suhayl Saadi

    Why did Hutton ban disclosure of medical reports on the Kelly case for 70 years and why did he make this ban secret?

    Does anyone plan to be around in approximately 2074 to find out? Will it matter then? “Ancient history, my boy, ancient history. Of course, you know we don’t do those things now!”

    I think that people will draw their own conclusions.

  • Walter Cairns

    Behind all the sophisticated humour Michael White (and Alan Rusbridger for that matter) is just a nasty little sh*t dragging the Guardian even more to the Right than it is now.

1 2

Comments are closed.