FOIA Request for the al-Jazeera Memo Denied: But Number 10 officially confirms it exists.
Steve from the FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] Blog has had a response to his request that the government disclose the contents of the now infamous al-Jazeera Memo and the details of the coversation between Bush and Blair about bombing al-Jazeera. [via Don't Bomb Us]
Unsuprisingly, the response was in the negative:
10 Downing St
22nd December 2005
Dear Mr Wood,
Thank you for your email of 24 November in which you request a copy of any memos or motes that record President Bush's discussions with the Prime Minister about the bombing of the al-Jazeera television station in Qatar. Your request has been handled under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
I can confirm that the cabinet Office holds information which is relevant to your request.
The information held comes under section 27 of the act (international relations). Section 27(1)(a) applies when disclosure of information would or would be likeley to predudice relations between the United Kingdom and any other State. Section 27 is a qualified exemption. In applying this exemption we have had to consider the public interest in maintaining the exemption against the public interest in disclosing the information.
The Cabinet Office accepts that there is a general public interest in greater transparency in how Government operates particularly in relation to an issue on which there has been public debate.
However, there are strong countervailing public interest factors. It would not be in the public interest to release information which would harm international relations. It is important that information pertaining to our discussions or relations with other states is protected. The effective conduct of international relations depends on maintaining trust and confidence between governments. This relationship allows for the freee and frank exchange of information on the understanding that it will be treated in confidence. If the United Kingdom does not respect such confidences, it's ability to protect and promote UK interests through international relations will be hampered. The states concerned may be more reluctant to share sensitive information with the United Kingdom Government in future and may be less likely to respect the confidentiality of information supplied by the United Kingdom Government to them, to the detriment of UK interests. this could have hte effect of prejudicing the UK's relations with other states and thus it's ability to protect its interests and its citizens effevtively.
This information therefore is being withheld.
Yours sincerely
Nikhil Rathi
The refusal to disclose on the grounds it would embarass Mr Bush comes as no suprise.
But official acknowlegement that: "the cabinet Office holds information which is relevant to your request" does!
Remember the original FOIA request was for "a copy of any memos or notes that record President Bush's discussions with the Prime Minister about the bombing of the al-Jazeera television station in Qatar."
Why is this important?
This confirms 'officially' what we already know. That there was a conversation between Bush and Blair on bombing al-Jazeera, and that the Cabinet Office holds documentary evidence of it.
So what did Blair mean when he branded talk of a conversation between him and Bush about bombing al-Jazeera as a Conspiracy Theory?
So what did Bush mean when he dismissed it as a Joke, and sent Scot McClellan out to deny, fillibuster and turn cartwheels as he claimed that he had no idea what reporters were asking him about?
It is all well and good for bloggers to draw attention to this. But reporters and politicians here and In the States, have been asking questions of our respective governments about this story and have been 'fobbed' off with denials, diversions and duplicity.
It is perhaps inevitable that this answer should be released the day after the Bliar's last press conference of 2005, but Christmas will soon be over - and if the press, media and our politicians have any self respect or dignity they should be challenging our leaders to account for those denials, diversions and duplicity.
Stories refering to a Cabinet Office answer, and the Mirror story that is in the public domain surely don't fall foul of the Official Secrets Act, even when wielded in such a heavy handed way by Lord Goldsmith.
[Note also, that there is no
[Note also, that there is no mention disclosure would reveal military secrets or strategy that might endanger our troops in Iraq.
The obvious conclusion is because that was not what was asked for, but could it be because the rest of the document allegedly concerning stratergy in Iraq is so contentious and damaging that keeping focus on the al-Jazeera bombing plan is actually preferable?!]
So we can see that the
So we can see that the government will go to exraordinary legnths to withold this memo, and it may or may not be leaked. but even in the absense of the actual memo we have a catalogue of lies and something approaching an admission. Surely blatantly misleading the public like this (and getting caught) is a resigning/sacking offence. Perhaps this should be thrust of the investigation now. The essential factor is the criminal negligence of the mainstream media.
We know that the memo is
We know that the memo is concerned with media which is perceived as hostile to the War on Truth. I suspect that the memo discusses other 'hostile' media and may even name groups or individuals to 'take out'.
Let there be no secrets.