Here is Andrew Sullivan's blog on Gilligan. Really damning, IMO.
>>GILLIGAN'S ISLAND OF UNTRUTH: It's worth recalling that the suspect BBC journalist in the David Kelly tragedy has a record. Yep, it was Gilligan who refused to believe that U.S. troops had reached Baghdad the day they did. His deep hostility to the war against Saddam has been his motivating force as a reporter since the conflict began. Here's a link to a story explaining his role that day:http://www.conquestdesign.com/html/BBC.html
Cut to: Andrew Gilligan, the BBC's man in downtown Baghdad. "I'm in the center of Baghdad," said a very dubious Gilligan, "and I don't see anything. But then the Americans have a history of making these premature announcements." Gilligan was referring to a military communiqué from Qatar the day before saying the Americans had taken control of most of Baghdad's airport. When that happened, Gilligan had told World Service listeners that he was there, at the airport - but the Americans weren't. Gilligan inferred that the Americans were lying. An hour or two later, a different BBC correspondent pointed out that Gilligan wasn't at the airport, actually. He was nearby - but apparently far enough away that the other correspondent felt it necessary to mention that he didn't really know if Gilligan was around, but that no matter what Gilligan had seen or not seen, the airport was firmly and obviously in American hands.
It was important to the BBC that Gilligan not be wrong twice in two days. Whatever the truth was, the BBC, like Walter Duranty's New York Times , must never say, "I was wrong." So, despite the fact that the appearance of American troops in Baghdad was surely one of the war's big moments, and one the BBC had obviously missed, American veracity became the story of the day. Gilligan, joined by his colleagues in Baghdad, Paul Wood and Rageh Omaar, kept insisting that not only had the Americans not gone to the "center" - which they reckoned to be where they were - they hadn't really been in the capital at all.What are the odds that this guy hyped the modest criticisms made by David Kelly in order to wound the Blair government? The BBC, it seems to me, broadcast something they knew to be untrue for political purposes. I have one suggestion: believe not a word the BBC is reporting on Iraq right now. They cannot be trusted. They want the liberation of Iraq to fail.http://andrewsullivan.com/ |
