Terror/War | ukwatch.net

Indie’s new editor means bad news

Ellie Keen — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 01:16:57 +0000

Roger Alton’s move from the Observer to edit the Independent is as shocking as Tony Blair’s appointment as Middle East envoy, and marks a set-back for the anti-war movement. To understand why, we must look at the Indie’s stance on Iraq, why Blair hated the paper, Alton’s politics and what he did at the Observer.

Alton was a crusader for the invasion of Iraq. As Johann Hari, who himself backed the invasion at the time, put it on the eve of the war: “There is now a considerable school of British centre-left thinkers and commentators who are lobbying hard for war, so that the Iraqi people can be freed: Christopher Hitchens, Nick Cohen, John Lloyd, Julie Burchill, Roger Alton and David Aaronovitch.”

In other words, Alton was up there with the worst of British journalists in terms of craven support of Bush and Blair and contempt for the anti-war case.

Hari’s observation is backed up by Nick Davies, who discovered that Alton had an intimate lunch with Blair in autumn 2002 “from which, according to colleagues, Alton returned full of determined support for the campaign against Saddam”. With the Observer’s home affairs correspondent David Rose being fed “sheer disinformation” by MI6, and its political editor Kamal Ahmed deep in Alastair Campbell’s pocket, readers of Alton’s newspaper were, as Davies catalogues in some detail, “slowly soaked in disinformation” about Iraq.

Yet Alton carried on with his support for the invasion. When columnist Richard Ingrams quit the paper in 2005, he insisted that the Observer’s stance on Iraq was damaging the paper: “It’s particularly noticeable on the whole Iraq issue. In the Indie, you had a very strong attack on the whole thing from the beginning. But The Observer’s got it wrong about Iraq, which goes on and on, and you’re clobbered by that unless you get up and say: ‘We got it wrong’.”

Ingrams was right that the gap between the Observer and the Independent was huge.

On the day after the Hutton report came out in January 2004, the Independent produced a totally white front page with a one-word headline: “WHITEWASH”. In Blair’s last major public speech as prime minister, he attacked the Independent, after which the paper splashed with: “Would you be saying this, Mr Blair, if we supported your war in Iraq?” Beneath that headline, the paper’s editor Simon Kelner hit back brilliantly at Blair:

“After 10 years of the Blair administration, a decade of spin and counter-spin, of dodgy dossiers, of 45-minute warnings, of burying bad news, of manipulation and misinformation, we feel that the need to interpret and comment upon the official version of events is more important than ever.”

Kelner saw it as a “badge of honour” to be singled out by Blair.

Will Alton take a similarly brave and principled stand against Gordon Brown and George Bush? It is enough just to ask the question to see what an absurd proposition that is. But if you need more proof, here it is from the horse’s mouth.

Alton on Blair: “Blair is fucking good.“

And again: “I think he’s a very good prime minister and an exceptional politician who will be much missed when he’s gone. Some of the hostility to him is quite baffling. I just can’t understand it. It doesn’t logically relate to things.”

Alton on editorial priorities: “Absolutely have your environmental horrors in Sudan, but you might put it on page four. On page three you might well have, as we did, inside Sven’s five-star England football World Cup love nest — just because it’s more

visual.”

On the prosecution of BNP leader Nick Griffin: “ludicrous… should never have been brought”.

On Kamal Ahmed: “Kamal is one of the best journalists I have ever worked with and of the highest integrity, so if anybody impinges his integrity I’ll go and punch his fucking face in.”

What Alton’s editorship of the Independent means is this.

Every pro-war editor will feel safer in his or her job, and more confident in their editorial line. Piers Morgan and Greg Dyke, sacked over Iraq, are still in the news media wilderness. But Alton has taken over the Indie. The message couldn’t be clearer.

Every other editor will feel under even more pressure to give in to the dominant pro-war assumptions: our leaders’ intentions in the “war on terror” are noble; Iraq is yesterday’s story and our audience doesn’t want to hear about it; the anti-war movement is beyond the pale, an unrepresentative rump that is stuck in a rut.

Every journalist will feel it that more difficult to stand out against the notion that the Iraq WMD fiasco is behind us, we can carry on as if nothing had happened.

Alton’s appointment at the Indie is a disgrace. The anti-war movement should watch closely what happens to the paper and be ready to mobilise against Alton in support of the Indie journalists who have made their paper the conscience of the British media.

Sign the pledge for action against an attack on Iran

Tim Holmes — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 14:13:45 +0000

The Stop the War coalition are now gathering pledges of action and civil disobedience against any attack on Iran. Given Seymour Hersh’s recent revelations that the White House’s most recent bombing plan “has had its most positive reception” from Gordon Brown (the British are “on board”, according to one of Hersh’s sources, quoting the President), the urgency of doing so can now hardly be understated.

You can sign their pledge of action here.

In addition, anyone who enjoys wasting their lives on social networking utilities (I know I do) can help gather support for civil disobedience against an attack on Iran by joining and supporting this group.

Students Say: No War on Iran

The Staff — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:57:36 +0000

(from the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military intervention in Iran)

In the strongest yet accusations of the alleged Iranian involvement in the killing of coalition soldiers and instability in Iran, General Petraeus, Senior US Commander in Iraq, reporting on the outcome of the “surge” strategy, accused Iran of fighting a “proxy war” with the coalition forces inside Iraq and threatened that this would spill across the border into Iran. The accusations and the deployment the following day, 12th September, of British troops to the border with Iran to guard against Iran’s “proxy war” seem to follow the carefully crafted path to the manufacture of a pretext for open confrontation and the possibility of a widespread bombardment of Iranian nuclear facilities, military, economic, political and civilian infrastructures. The illegal violation of the Syrian air space on 6th September by a host of Israeli fighter planes has also been interpreted widely as a precursor of a military attack on Iranian nuclear plants.

This accelerated shift away from the pursuit of US-Iran bilateral dialogue and towards military confrontation follows months of systematic planning by the neo-conservatives of the Bush-Cheney camp to sabotage any prospect of diplomacy. Accusing the Iranian government for the killing of American servicemen and the violence and destabilization in Iraq in the unanimous passage (97-0) by the congress of Amendment to the Defense Authorization Bill, 11 July, and Bush’s subsequent authorization on 28th August of the US military to “confront Tehran’s murderous activities”, have been followed by another Amendment to the Bill, 25th September, authorizing the military to take all necessary action to combat Iran, and the unprecedented branding of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, as a terrorist organization. These carefully crafted moves are designed to systematically clear the path and set the scene for a casus belli.

Dr Mohamed El-Baradei, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has warned against what seemed like war drums prior to the invasion of Iraq, whilst UN officials have warned that American efforts toward a military confrontation with Iran are “out of control.” In response to Dr ElBradei’s comments, the US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has sharply criticised the IAEA, stating that the agency “is not in the business of diplomacy”. Alarmingly, the French Foreign Minister too has said that France must prepare itself for war with Iran and has threatened that if Iran refuses to comply with the Security Council resolutions to halt the enrichment of uranium, the only route forward would be a military one.

Shirin Saeidi of CASMII said today:

“While the people of Iran go about their daily lives, studying, working, and raising families, warmongers in Washington, London, and Tel Aviv, determine their future by finalizing military logistic plans.”

“Students have historically played a vital role in protest and massive mobilization against international aggression, and it is time for our presence and voices to be heard. Students can prepare teach-in sessions at universities, invite speakers versed in the conflict, disperse informational literature regarding the US-Iran stand-off on campuses, and mobilize meetings to stop a military attack on Iran.”

In these circumstances of the possibility of a planned, pre-emptive war on Iran, the Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran (CASMII) urges its student supporters to rise up on University campuses in the United States, the United Kingdom and France to voice their opposition to the current militaristic discourse stemming out of the White House.

For further information on how you can help, please visit http://www.campaigniran.org