FIOA Blog gets a response from the US State Department on the Al Jazeera memo
Steve Wood from the FOIA Blog has been trying to get hold of the Al Jazeera memo or related documents using the Freedom of Information Acts of both the UK and the USA.
We reported on Steve's efforts in the UK here, here, here and here. Basically the Cabinet Office confirmed the existance of the memo and what was in it but wouldn't release it because of the damage it would do to US/UK relations.
Well, obviously the memo exists otherwise two men wouldn't be on trial for leaking it.
So its strange that Steve's request to the US State Department should meet with a rather different response. After a seven month wait, his patience was rewarded with the not very illuminating:
Really? Despite the then Secretary of State Colin Powell being present with Bush and Blair at the meeting (according to Peter Kilfoyle MP who saw the memo) there is apparantly no record of it in the USA.
Read the whole post which has relevant links to Steve's other attempts to get to the bottom of this.
On page 137 of Ron Suskind's
On page 137 of Ron Suskind's book, 'The One Per Cent Doctrine',
'Tenet pressed [al-Thani] to rein in [Al Jazeera]. The Emir [of Qatar] explained... a hard-and-fast rule to never get involved in issues of coverage. There was nothing he could do.
The CIA saw its options more broadly. As Krongard [CIA Executive Director until 2004] says, "It came down to a principle you'd hear again and again.... Talk to them in a way they understand."
On November 13... a U.S. missile obliterated Al Jazeera's [Kabul] office.... "This office has been known by everybody, the American airplanes know the location of the office," said Al Jazeera's managing director, Mohammed Jasim al-Ali. "They know we are broadcasting from there."
All that, in fact, was correct.
Inside the CIA, and White House, there was satisfaction that a message had been sent to Al Jazeera.'
If Keogh and O'Connor are mounting a public interest defence, acting to reveal and prevent a crime, then evidence of a previous crime of a similar nature increases their credibility.
'After a seven month wait,
'After a seven month wait, his patience was rewarded with the not very illuminating:
"no records responsive to your request were located"'.
Obviously the Americans have mastered the more elegant and blame-proof technique of "passive resistance". Why argue with the punters, when you can just quietly grind them down? It's genius: wait for half a year, then say you are sorry, but can't quite seem to... What was the question again?
I used to have a manager who was a past master of this method. After favouring us all with 45 minutes of his table talk, he asked for questions. If anyone was rash enough to ask one, he would (more or less) repeat everything word for word, but substantially slower, then ask if there were any more questions. As the whole session was conducted after working hours, it took us less than no time to decode the hidden message that questions were not, in fact, welcome.