By ROBERT BARR
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.
In Qatar, Al-Jazeera said it was aware of the report, but did not wish to comment.
The White House said it wouldn’t dignify what it called “something so outlandish” with a response.
The document was described as a transcript of a conversation between the two leaders.
Cabinet Office civil servant David Keogh is accused of passing it to Leo O’Connor, who formerly worked for former British lawmaker Tony Clarke. Both Keogh and O’Connor are scheduled to appear at London’s Bow Street Magistrates Court next week.
According to the Crown Prosecution Service, Keogh was charged with an offense under Section 3 of the Official Secrets Act relating to “a damaging disclosure” by a servant of the Crown of information relating to international relations or information obtained from a state other than the United Kingdom.
O’Connor was charged under Section 5, which relates to receiving and disclosing illegally disclosed information.
According to the newspaper, Clarke returned the memo to Blair’s office. Clarke did not respond to calls from The Associated Press seeking comment.
Press Association, the British news agency, said Clarke refused to discuss the contents of the document. PA quoted Clarke as saying his priority was to support O’Connor who did “exactly the right thing” in bringing it to his attention.
Peter Kilfoyle, a former defense minister in Blair’s government, called for the document to be made public.
“I think they ought to clarify what exactly happened on this occasion,” he said. “If it was the case that President Bush wanted to bomb Al-Jazeera in what is after all a friendly country, it speaks volumes and it raises questions about subsequent attacks that took place on the press that wasn’t embedded with coalition forces,” the newspaper quoted Kilfoyle as saying.
Sir Menzies Campbell, foreign affairs spokesman for the opposition Liberal Democrats, said Tuesday that, if true, the memo was worrying.
“If true, then this underlines the desperation of the Bush administration as events in
Iraq began to spiral out of control,” he said. “On this occasion, the prime minister may have been successful in averting political disaster, but it shows how dangerous his relationship with President Bush has been.”
Al-Jazeera offices in Iraq and Afghanistan have been hit by U.S. bombs or missiles, but each time the U.S. military said they were not intentionally targeting the broadcaster.
In April 2003, an Al-Jazeera journalist was killed when its Baghdad office was struck during a U.S. bombing campaign. Nabil Khoury, a State Department spokesman in Doha, said the strike was a mistake.
In November 2002, Al-Jazeera’s office in Kabul, Afghanistan, was destroyed by a U.S. missile. None of the crew was at the office at the time. U.S. officials said they believed the target was a terrorist site and did not know it was Al-Jazeera’s office.
so, are we at war with qatar now, or does bushy junior get to bomb whomever he pleases, for whatever reason he wishes, without having to run it by his consitiuents first? 8/
Monday, November 14, 2005
Beset with an unpopular war and an American public increasingly less trusting, President Bush faces the lowest approval rating of his presidency, according to a national poll released Monday.
Bush also received his all-time worst marks in three other categories in the CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll. The categories were terrorism, Bush’s trustworthiness and whether the Iraq war was worthwhile.
Bush’s 37 percent overall approval rating was two percentage points below his ranking in an October survey. Both polls had a sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.
Sixty percent of the 1,006 adult Americans interviewed by telephone Friday through Sunday said they disapprove of how Bush is handling his job as president.
The White House has said it doesn’t pay attention to poll numbers and the figures do not affect policy.
“We have a proud record of accomplishment and a positive agenda for the future,” White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters Wednesday.
“We look forward to continuing to talk about it. I mean, you can get caught up in polls; we don’t. Polls are snapshots in time.”
Bush, who received high marks after the terrorist attacks of 2001, also rated poorly in the new poll for his policy on terrorism. For the first time, less than half — 48 percent — of those surveyed said they approved of how the president was handling the war on terror. Forty-nine percent said they disapprove.
In November 2001, Bush had an 87 percent overall approval mark and an 86 percent rating on terrorism.
Bush has been under fire from Democratic lawmakers for the way his administration made the case to invade Iraq in 2003 and how it has handled the conflict since then.
The president fired back in a speech Monday, accusing Democrats of “playing politics.”
In the new poll, 60 percent said it was not worth going to war in Iraq, while 38 percent said it was worthwhile. The question was asked of about half of those surveyed and had a margin of error of five percentage points. The results marked a decline in support of seven percentage points from two months earlier.
Bush’s lowest approval ratings came on two issues that divide his own Republican Party.
On federal spending, 71 percent disapproved of his performance and 26 percent approved. The approval rating was the same on immigration issues, and the disapproval mark was 65 percent.
Sixty-one percent of respondents disapproved of Bush’s handling of the economy, and 37 percent approved.
The country appears to be split on whether Bush is a strong president and whether or not Americans personally like him.
When asked about his abilities, 49 percent of those surveyed said he was a strong president and 49 percent said he was a weak leader.
About 50 percent of people polled said they disliked Bush, with 6 percent claiming to hate the president.
Bush’s overall approval mark matched the 37 percent rating of newly elected President Clinton in June 1993.
When asked if they trust Bush more than they had Clinton, 48 percent of respondents said they trusted Bush less, while 36 percent said they trusted him more and 15 percent said they trusted Bush the same as Clinton.
For the first time, more than half of the public thinks Bush is not honest and trustworthy — 52 percent to 46 percent.
A week ago, President Bush campaigned for Virginia gubernatorial candidate Jerry Kilgore, who lost the election a day later to Democratic Lt. Gov. Tim Kaine. (Full story)
In the poll, 56 percent of registered voters said they would be likely to vote against a local candidate supported by Bush, while 34 percent said the opposite.
Only 9 percent said their first choice in next year’s elections would be a Republican who supports Bush on almost every major issue.
Forty-six percent said the country would be better off if Congress were controlled by Democrats, while 34 percent backed a GOP majority.
A large majority of Republicans — 80 percent — approve of Bush’s performance, compared with 28 percent of independents and 7 percent of Democrats. Those results had a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points.
Vice President Dick Cheney’s approval rating has dropped 14 points since the start of the year, down from 54 percent in January to 40 percent.
His chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, resigned last month after he was indicted on charges including obstruction of justice and perjury. Libby is accused of lying to investigators and a grand jury investigating the disclosure of the identity of a CIA officer whose husband criticized the White House case for war.
Not surprising. There are not a whole lot of things I wouldn’t suspect Bush Junior of trying to do, whether or not anyone approved of it. By bombing al-Jazeera, he’d incite anti-U.S. sentiment for even more years to come.
Three more years is far too long.
i don’t want to overestimate the integrity of congressional republicans, but i think if bush bombed jazeera deliberately, and admitted as much openly, there would be overt movements towards impeachment on both sides of the isle. that’s pretty much beyond the pale even for those folk. i would hope.