BLUNKETTEERING
This may be a lengthy exercise, but having read a false story about Fairford protests on ICBerkshire I've decided to investigate the origins of the comments to discover whether what was reported was a double set of lies by David Blunkett or just the usual single set with inaccuracies reported in genuine error by a reporter
( Read more... )
Date: 24/09/03 14:13:56 GMT Daylight Time
From: KtHolcombe
To: corrections@ananova.com
Dear Sirs,
The below story was recently published by the Trinity Mirror Group, on account of the fact that it is innacurate and extremely damaging to protesters at USAF Fairford I have pursued the matter with them. They have informed me that the story came from Ananova and was published as supplied to them by yourselves.
As perfectly peaceful and legitimate protesters at USAF Fairford we have been falsely maligned by David Blunkett on several occasions.
In the below report you state that Blunkett accuses protesters at USAF Fairford in July of having Swords and Cudgels.....now, I have found Blunketts statement to the Home Affairs Select Committee on 11th Sept. where he blatantly lies about the fact that protesters were armed in such a way, or in anyway at all ( if they had been the police would surely have confiscated such items - and they certainly never have done), but I can find no reference to Blunkett lying about protests at Fairford in July.
Blunketts strategy with regard to protests at the Blair Regimes ' war' has consistently been to lie about the nature of the protests and to try and portray protests in a bad light.
I should like to know from where you gained your information that protesters at Fairford were subjected to ' Stop and Search' incidents during July.
To my knowledge I personally was the only person searched at or near USAF Fairford in July. I was pulled off the road by the police under Terrorism 2000 Act on the pretext of them looking for ' offensive literature'. I was made to unroll banners which were in my car in order for them to try and find anything ' offensive', which needless to say they didn't .
Far from it being the case that Blunkett authorises Terrorism 2000 Act in order to search for items relating to terrorism, Blunkett authorises the Act in order for the police to examine banners and leaflets which is behaviour which is being questioned via legal channels.
Below article apparently written by Annanova.
Looking forward to your reply,
Many Thanks,
Kate Holcombe
Tel. 0774 8015601
National
Home Secretary David Blunkett warned that anti-terrorist powers would be
discredited if they were repeatedly abused by police.
He told MPs from the cross-party Home Affairs Select Committee that he
expected a report by next week from the Met on their controversial use of
counter-terrorism powers against arms demonstrators.
"Initial findings overnight indicated that two non-British nationals were
picked up and the police believed that they were justified in doing so under
the
Terrorism Act. I need to know that other people on whom the Act was applied
were justified," he said.
Asked by David Winnick if he agreed there was a danger that the Terrorism Act
would be discredited if the powers were used incorrectly, he said: "If it
were repeatedly used in a way which was subsequently found to be inappropriate,
then yes, I would.
"The balance is crucial if people are to have confidence when we do use the
legislation."
Campaign group Liberty has lodged papers seeking a judicial review of the
Metropolitan Police's use of powers under section 44 of the Terrorism Act.
The civil rights group said dozens of activists had been stopped, some for up
to 45 minutes, violating their democratic right to protest.
They have accused police and Mr Blunkett - who has to give officers the
go-ahead to use the powers - of using the legislation "illegally".
Mr Blunkett told the committee that police who used the same powers against
demonstrators at RAF Fairford in July had acted properly because some
protesters had been armed with "cudgels and swords".
"The actions taken were necessary to protect not only those on the base," he
said.
http://icberkshire.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/nationalnews/content_objectid=133972\
02_method=full_siteid=50102_headline=--Anti-terror-laws-mustn-t-be-abuse
d--name_page.html
Reply
Date: 24/09/03 14:32:08 GMT Daylight Time
From: Simon.Glover@leeds.orange.co.uk
To: KtHolcombe@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Hi Kate,
Thanks for your message. We no longer supply Trinity Mirror with news so I think somebody must have got confused. I understand that they take their live news from Reuters these days, if that helps.
However, I can tell you that the Press Association filed that particular story to us on September 11. It seems clear from their version, and from the article you pasted below, that the claim that Fairford protesters were armed with "cudgels and swords" was in Mr Blunkett's evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee on Sept 11.
Best wishes
Simon Glover
Editor (News)
Tel: 0113 367 4601
Email: simon.glover@orange.co.uk
Orange Multimedia Operations
Marshall Mill
Marshall Street
Leeds
LS11 9YJ
Ananova Limited Registered Office: Orange PCS, St James Court, Great Park Road, Almondsbury Park, Bradley Stoke, Bristol BS32 4QJ. Registered in England No. 2858918
-----Original Message-----
From: KtHolcombe@aol.com [mailto:KtHolcombe@aol.com]
Sent: 24 September 2003 14:14
To: Corrections
Subject: Cudgels and Swords
Dear Sirs,
The below story was recently published by the Trinity Mirror Group, on account of the fact that it is innacurate and extremely damaging to protesters at USAF Fairford I have pursued the matter with them. They have informed me that the story came from Ananova and was published as supplied to them by yourselves.
Reply
Date: 24/09/03 15:22:06 GMT Daylight Time
From: KtHolcombe
To: grahamspence@trinitysouth.co.uk
Hi Graham,
Thanks for your reply, I have written to Ananova explaining my ' problem' and they have sent me the following reply.
I really do need to get to the bottom of this for obvious reasons so am coming back to you for confirmation that Ananova do infact suppy you with news.
Below my email to Ananova and their reply :-
Dear Sirs,
The below story was recently published by the Trinity Mirror Group, on account of the fact that it is innacurate and extremely damaging to protesters at USAF Fairford I have pursued the matter with them. They have informed me that the story came from Ananova and was published as supplied to them by yourselves.
Reply
Date: 24/09/03 16:14:32 GMT Daylight Time
From: grahamspence@trinitysouth.co.uk
To: KtHolcombe@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Hi Kate ... I have just referred this to our head office, and I'm afraid my
info was wrong. We switched from Ananova to the Press Association (who
actually own ananova) a few months back, so that story would have been
supplied by them. Our contact number for any PA queries is 0207 963 7565.
Sorry about that.
Cheers
Graham
KtHolcombe@aol
.com To: grahamspence@trinitysouth.co.uk cc:
24/09/2003 Subject: Re: Feedback 15:22
Hi Graham,
Thanks for your reply, I have written to Annanova explaining my ' problem'
and they have sent me the following reply.
I really do need to get to the bottom of this for obvious reasons so am
coming back to you for confirmation that Annanova do infact suppy you with
news.
Reply
Leave a comment