Posted on 08/13/2003 8:40:23 AM PDT by Timesink
|
|
Initially the journalist appeared to be surviving the scrutiny. He mounted a calm defence of his reporting on the second day of the judicial inquiry into why David Kelly, the weapons expert, apparently committed suicide after being named as the source for Mr Gilligan's story that the government exaggerated its case for war with Iraq.
But as the hearing wore on, it became clear that he was becoming increasingly damned by the words of others on the corporation payroll. And as it did so his initially confident if muted response to questioning descended into a mumble.
Swamped by his sober blue suit after having lost weight since the affair erupted, Mr Gilligan began his four hours of evidence in a quiet, hesitant manner unlike his radio persona.
He had met David Kelly twice before the encounter at London's Charing Cross Hotel on May 22 that was to spark his report, which claimed Downing Street had "sexed up" its dossier on Iraq's military capability in the week before publication last September. He later indicated that came at the behest of Alastair Campbell, the prime minister's director of communications.
In particular, he alleged the government had inserted a claim that Saddam Hussein could deploy weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes against the wishes of intelligence officials and probably knowing it was inaccurate.
Mr Gilligan produced interview notes from the meeting, taken on his personal organiser, to back up his story. They read (including misspellings and abbreviations): "Transformed wk before pub to make it sexier.
"The classic was the 45 mins. Most things indossier were dbl sc but that was single-source. One source said it took 4[5] minutes to set up mobile assembly. That was misinterpreted.
"Most people in intel werent happy with it because it didn't reflect the considereview they were putting forward.
"Campbell."
Examined by James Dingemans QC, the inquiry's counsel, Mr Gilligan explained his questions to Mr Kelly about why the dossier was changed. "I said: 'To make it sexier?' He said: 'Yes, to make it sexier'."
Asked how it came to be transformed: "The answer was that one word [Campbell]."
To try to corroborate his story, Mr Gilligan contacted two "senior contacts in government" who neither confirmed nor denied it, although one suggested he should "keep digging".
He said he examined the language in the document and believed it showed clear signs of being "hardened". He also said the 45-minute claim had hardly been mentioned in parliament after the dossier was released, which seemed strange if it was so important.
But then things began to get harder for Mr Gilligan.
He admitted the words he used in his first broadcast on May 29, that the government "probably knew the 45-minute figure was wrong, even before it decided to put it in" were "not perfect".
Mr Dingemans said: "There is no doubt, is there, that part of the reason that the dispute between No 10 and the BBC became so heated was because of the perception of conscious wrongdoing?" Mr Gilligan said it was not a perception that he had intended to "come across as strongly as it did in that 6.07 two-way", and he did not use the same words in later broadcasts.
Then it got tougher still. The inquiry heard an e-mail written by Kevin Marsh, Today programme editor, to Stephen Mitchell, head of radio news at the BBC, on June 27 describing Mr Gilligan's story. It said: "Our biggest millstone has been his loose use of language and lack of judgment in his phraseology" and suggested Mr Gilligans's "distant" relationship with the programme, often working from home, should be more carefully controlled.
Next came a minute from a BBC governors' meeting on July 6, noting that Mr Gilligan had not always used "careful" language.
After the lunch break, Mr Gilligan disputed Mr Kelly's evidence to the parliamentary foreign affairs select committee and the intelligence and security committee about their meeting. The weapons expert denied bringing up the name of Mr Campbell and told them the words used by Mr Gilligan "did not sound like something I would say".
But Mr Gilligan insisted Mr Kelly knew what he intended to report because he checked the quotes with him.
The inquiry was also told of the "frosty" relationship between Mr Campbell and Mr Gilligan. Although the two have never met, Mr Campbell sent letters to the BBC complaining about Mr Gilligan's choice of words in a number of his reports during the Iraq war.
That, Mr Gilligan insisted, was why he did not name Mr Campbell in his Today reports, lest it seem like a personal attack. Only once The Guardian had named Mr Campbell, he said, he felt free to do the same in an article for the Mail on Sunday, which was approved in theory but not vetted by BBC managers.
The revelation from Susan Watts, science editor of Newsnight, that Mr Kelly mentioned Mr Campbell's name to her in connection with the 45-minute claim in the dossier appeared to establish the veracity of Mr Gilligan's story.
But despite considering Mr Kelly an authoritative source, she considered the remark to be "gossipy".
ASHINGTON, Jan. 21 — Iraq has rebuilt a series of factories that the United States has long suspected of producing chemical and biological weapons, according to senior government officials. The new intelligence estimate could confront President Bush with an early test of his pledge to take a tougher stance against President Saddam Hussein than the Clinton administration did.
The factories — in an industrial complex in Falluja, west of Baghdad — include two that were bombed and badly damaged by American and British air raids in December 1998 to punish Mr. Hussein for his refusal to cooperate with United Nations weapons inspectors, the government officials said.
The new intelligence estimates were mentioned, but without any such specific details, in a report on weapons threats released on Jan. 10 by the outgoing secretary of defense, William S. Cohen. It warned that Iraq had rebuilt at least its weapons infrastructure and may have begun covertly producing some chemical or biological agents.
Last week, the officials provided details on what they said was the reconstruction of the two factories, and the resumption of the production of chlorine at a third in the same complex.
The factories have ostensibly commercial purposes, but all three were previously involved in producing chemical or biological agents and were among those closely monitored by the United Nations inspectors, the officials said. One of the rebuilt factories, for example, is making castor oil used in brake fluid, the Iraqis say, but the mash from castor beans contains a deadly biological toxin called ricin, the officials said.
~~~~
While officials have previously disclosed that Iraq had rebuilt missile plants destroyed in the 1998 strikes, the Jan. 10 report released by Mr. Cohen was the first public acknowledgment of the resumption of work at suspected chemical and biological plants.
"Some of Iraq's facilities could be converted fairly quickly to production of chemical weapons," the report said at one point. It went on to warn, "Iraq retains the expertise, once a decision is made, to resume chemical agent production within a few weeks or months, depending on the type of agent."
I thought I put "Death by Typewriter" up on FreeRepublic. But it certainly appeared on ChronWatch, the conservative (believe it or not) website that's attached to the San Francisco Chronicle. Here's the address of that article, published there. I gather you know how to make this an operating link:
http://www.chronwatch.com/featured/contentDisplay.asp?aid=3649
Cheers,
Billybob
gcruse fixed us up on the link.
Excerpt:
But if Gilligan is in trouble, Dr David Kelly’s reputation is also being hurt by the inquiry.
There is no doubt that this distinguished scientist lied to his bosses, lied to the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee and lied to the Intelligence and Security Committee.
~snip~
I have also posted extensive excerpts on two other threads from Kelly's testimony to the committee showing how deceptive he was regarding his meeting and communication with Susan Watts.
The BBC is disgusting, but Dr. Kelly was not a victim.
No, Kelly said there were questions from other professionals. That's what he told these reporters. He denied that to the committee, perhaps knowing there were no names to name.
Actually, he did not, but he was very deceptive in his representation of his communications with her. I posted about it on another thread and provide a link to his entire testimony.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.