another HUGE story resurfaces in UK... but is never mention in the US

[salin]

First - after you glance at this - please write a note and answer the following:

1. I remember reading the story last Winter/Spring (when it broke);
2. If yes to number 1; I remember seeing the story in a US source, from a UK source, from another international source, or I don't remember.
3. I have heard this story refered to between then and now.

Why are these questions important? Because many of us here follow the news, national and international very closely. And this was a shattering story when it broke... but it immediately fell silent. However, and this is significant, shortly after it broke, the US ended all attempts to go back to the UN and the security council (this is AFTER the Powell speech) and decided to go it alone. Either knowing that if they pushed the UN thing further - this story would break here (and they would lose more of the public's support); or that they learned from their spying that they would never win - and rather than risk getting a negative vote and then going to war... spin it as decided "time is growing too tight and too dangerous... we must go in (virtually alone) now!".

The story: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=243667 or: http://www.guardian.co.uk/freedom/Story/0,2763,1095151,00.html

In short... a Brit official leaked memos from the US National Security Agency (Condi's outfit) that it was engaging in spying on UN security council delegates in NYC in the lead up to the vote to go invade Iraq (a vote - which I believe, never happened... we just went ahead).

The story in the news NOW is that this offical faces charges and a trial for "leaking spying info."

But that first story... that the US was engaging in tapping home and work phones (and offices?) of UN security council members, to get information that could be used to 'persuade' them to vote in favor of the US - is shocking. I think the story should be more broadly circulated here. If the cause was so just - and our evidence for cause so 'clear' why did the US believe it needed to resort to collecting info to use (for blackmail?) to secure affirmative votes from the UN to allow the invasion of Iraq?

Answers to my own questions.

1. Yes.
2. UK source (I believe); I don't recall EVER seeing it refered to in the US media.
3. I don't remember the story from the time it broke, until now.

[salin]

1. Hellloooooooooooo................ are folks reading this and passing

as in its just not a big deal?

BTW, are UN delegates offices like embassies? Are they considered national (their) property? If so - would this type of spying fall under whose laws?

[JackRiddler]

34. STILL A HUGE STORY...

successfully covered up. I'd forgotten it until I got the follow-up story:

THE TRANSLATOR WHO REVEALED THIS CRIME IS UNDER ARREST RIGHT NOW IN BRITAIN!!!

What are we doing to Free Katharine Gun?

November 13, 2003:

Former U.K. Intelligence Worker Arrested

APO 13/11/2003 22:32

> > LONDON (AP) -- Police charged a former British intelligence employee
> >with breaking state secrecy laws Thursday, after she was linked to the
> >disclosure of a memo in which U.S. officials allegedly asked for British
> >help in eavesdropping on U.N. envoys.
> > Katharine Gun, 29, who worked as a translator for the Government
> >Communications Headquarters, was arrested in March after a British
> >newspaper published the memo, which came as the United States still hoped
> >to win U.N. backing for the war in Iraq.
> > In the memo allegedly from U.S. officials, the intelligence agency was
> >asked for help bugging the home and office telephones of delegates of key
> >countries on the U.N. Security Council. The agency in Cheltenham, western
> >England, uses high-tech equipment to monitor international communications.
> > Gun, who was fired in June, was charged under a section of Britain's
> >Official Secrets Act, which bars the unauthorized disclosure of security
> >and intelligence information. Police didn't elaborate on the charges or say
> >if they were in connection to the memo.
> > The Jan. 31 memo sent to The Observer newspaper reportedly originated
> >from the U.S. National Security Agency. It said that the NSA had begun a
> >"surge" of extra eavesdropping on officials from Angola, Cameroon, Chile,
> >Bulgaria, Guinea and Pakistan -- then all members of the Security Council.
> > The NSA in Washington couldn't be reached for comment Thursday.
> >Britain's Government Communications Headquarters refuses to discuss the
> >case, saying it is a matter for police.
> > Gun, who is free on bail pending a hearing on Nov. 27, said that the
> >disclosures were justified because they "exposed serious illegality and
> >wrongdoing on the part of the U.S. government who attempted to subvert our
> >own security services." She also defended the disclosures as an attempt to
> >prevent the deaths of Iraqi civilians and British troops in a war.
> > "No one has suggested -- nor could they -- that any payment was sought
> >or given for any alleged disclosures. I have only ever followed my
> >conscience," she said in the statement, released by Liberty, a human rights
> >group representing her.
> >
> >Copyright 2003 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information
> >contained in this news report may not be published, broadcast or otherwise
> >distributed without the prior written authority of the Associated Press.
> >
> >----End Forwarded Message(s)----

[IndianaGreen]

2. Yes, UK, I haven't heard a word since...

This was discussed in DU, up until the arrest under the Official Secrets Act. The story was buried!

[salin]

3. I remember discussions for about a week

then the attention went (correctly so) straight to the preinvasion/invasion. So even the discussion here, was short lived.

I fear that most people have NEVER heard of this story, let alone thought about (and began to articulate) its significance.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

4. Two mentioned it, but played down the importance of the story...

New York Times, Networks Shun U.N. Spying Story
March 11, 2003
<http://www.fair.org/activism/un-observer-spying.html>

"With media attention focused intensely on the U.N. Security Council debate over Iraq, the London-based Observer newspaper broke a major story on March 2: The United States is apparently engaged in a spying campaign against the diplomatic delegations from several Security Council nations. Despite the timeliness and relevance of the Observer’s scoop, some major news outlets in the United States have taken a pass on the story."

...SNIP...

"In the wake of the Observer article, reports in the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times seemed to downplay the importance of the matter. The L.A. Times headlined its March 4 piece 'Purported Spy Memo May Add to U.S. Troubles at U.N.,' while the subhead read: 'Top secret document discusses bugging of council members. Forgery or no, some say it's nothing to get worked up about.' The lead sentence referred to a 'long-standing U.S. practice of spying at the United Nations.' The Washington Post's March 4 story, headlined 'Spying Report No Shock to U.N.,' was similarly unimpressed with the Observer’s findings."

[salin]

6. thanks for the FAIR link... so the US press view was "spying is not new"

and thus not newsworthy.

Noone seemed to raise the question of... why if the Admin evidence was so strong, they were looking for means to blackmail UN Security Council members. Or whether this played a role in the UN abandoning securing support for the invasion.

Or most likely - that the Admin doesn't want to be conjuring images up that compare to Nixon and watergate... while trying to ride some kind of pseudo 'MORAL' image that they use to give themselves the 'moral imperative' to strike any country that they fancy needs striking (even when those actions make US National Security MORE shakey rather than safer.)

[Media_Lies_Daily]

27. Incredible, isn't it? Just shows the control they have over the press.

[LSparkle]

5. I'm outraged

Because, although I consider myself an alternative news surfer, I didn't hear about this. What good does a vote do when we're up against this kind of censorship? We don't even get the truth -- and even if we do get it, what the F can we do about it?

[salin]

8. I believe... that WE become the news

a) more and more people read sources like DU's LBN for primary news coverage. The value here is that these stories get posted - but more important is when WE the readers - comment on those stories (so they stay up longer, and so that readers get some analysis along wiht the stories) - and add links to related stories.

b) when we stumble upon really big stories that are not getting much coverage... we can start collecting a few related links and sending them to colleagues... or can (saw this on another thread) print up the story and stick it on a few bulletin boards in the community.

There have been several stories that were just simmering on the altnerative news sites that suddenly were kicked up to the mainstream when enough buzz in the progressive news community was growing that it was too hard for the mainstream to completely ignore.

Finally it is collecting these stories (at least links to them) to have as references in the future when discussion the current political situation with folks that are moving towards the fence... one can refer to these stories - and offer to get them more information if they are interested. It is our 'ammunition', if you will. I honestly believe with the media as it is.. and the next election about to have a HUGE money advantage for the right... that it will take a gazillion one on one conversations with nonvoters and fence sitters - armed with info like this (and many other stories) that paints a picture that is different than the PR offered in the regular media - to turn the tide against bush. WE will become the new media, and the on the ground campaigners. WE will be what it takes to turn things around in this country. WE are the new patriots.

[MrPrax]

7. Yup..it was big

I remember it and the subsequent British investigation that lead to the 'arrest' of the British intelligence officer...I remember thinking that this war is really really unpopular...

1) yup

2) not only did get wide play if any in the US, the fact that Cameroon told Bush to fuck off, didn't get much coverage either...since the UN was already written off as irrelevent

3) often wonder whatever happened about this and remembering that Kofi is kinda pathetic for having his Institution, Blix, UN team and his Respect being pissed on by Bush and doing next to nothing about it..but then again Kofi was installed by the US preference, so he makes for the worst UN head since Kurt Waldheim

[salin]

9. indeed.... never heard that Cameroon told bush to stuff it.

The whole UN drama is once again getting interesting. The neocons who have hated the institution and were hoping for a two-fer-one (get their war on - and kill the UN) - are instead having their likely long-term fates entwined with the UN. While they are still resisting this reality... they have to keep going acourting... because the reality ... as much as their blind ideology tries to obscure - is that the only way out of this mess without complete chaos... is through the UN.

[supernova]

10. I remember this story

I remember it being discussed here. I was very shocked at the time, thinking it the next level in infamy on the Watergate scale.

I remember reading the Guardian article too, but I haven't heard a peep about it since.

[salin]

11. Maybe we need to raise some noise about the story. Maybe one of our

local flash artists might be persuaded to dabble in this direction.

[Donna Zen]

12. I was wondering about this:

1) Yes

2) Yes...but basically the US version was nothing to see here, move on, SOP

3) It totally disappeared. I'm not kidding that I was wondering a few days ago what happened to this.

Actually, when the story totally went dead, I figured that the SOP meme was correct. God, when will I ever learn? They lie all the time.

[salin]

14. hence the volumes of materials that keeps a slew of 'Bush Lies' books

on top of the best sellers list. They really do lie all the time.

[HereSince1628]

13. 1. Yes, 2. UK for sure

maybe an echo from a Mexican paper, 3. Nothing until now...

[salin]

15. This is still in the UK

unless it was also reported today in the US.

[last1standing]

16. Sad, huh?

My answers:

1. Yes.
2. I saw it in a thread here at DU. I get most of my news from the links here.
3. I haven't seen it since then, either.

As for the way this is getting so few responses compared to the partisan hatemongering threads that are doing so well here, that's sad and pathetic.

[salin]

18. I hear ya...

btw... I once lived in the aa/ypsi area and worked in Detroit! Left for California and am now due south of ya in Indiana.

[last1standing]

24. Welcome back to the cold winters.

Its good to have you back in the midwest where we need the demo vote. :)

[juajen]

17. My answers below

1. Yes

2. I believe I heard it first in The Guardian.

3. Yes, I have heard it referred to. I believe I read it on Buszflash within a day or so. I also heard it from CNN and MSNBC. I think I heard a story on CBS and ABC also. All of these, I believe, were within two weeks of the initial story. I rarely watch Fox.

[salin]

19. Good - perhaps the 'development' in the story

might push them to follow up the story. Or at least prime them that there might be a very news/juicy trial upcoming in Britain in January (according to this article).

Perhaps we need to start writing - requesting updates. Because the story right now is being reported dry (not focusing on WHAT the leak suggested, but on the leak itself and her legal culpability) - perhaps we push to get their awareness up for the trial - where it looks like she will be using the CONTENT and concern of the 'illegal war' (her terms) as rationale/defense. Covering that story would FORCE the details of the NSA spying activity into the news coverage.

Wonder how we create a strategy to get a buzz going over the impending trial - so that network news has its ears to the ground and covers the trial (if it goes to trial).

[DoYouEverWonder]

20. So many scandals

So little time.

The daily revelations of continous lying and wrong doing by this misadministration are astounding. Even more astonding is the fact that the US mainstream media tries to ignore these scandals as much as possible. Oh they mention them in passing, but then they add a snide comment and move along to more important stories like Lacie or Michael.

All I can say is thank god for the internet. This is the one tool that we have at our disposal that they don't grok yet. As a result, more and more people are finding out what is really going on and sooner or later these treasonist bastards will be removed from power.

[Unknown Known]

21. Yes, I remember this story and also remember that it died

just like the Plame story. Just one more nail in the coffin of truth. This is one brave lady - another woman with ovaries of steel:toast:

[leftchick]

22. Yes, UK, Not a peep since then....

I am still not holding out hope for anything on this side of the pond......

[JNelson6563]

23. my answers are just like yours

so much for freedom of the press, eh?

Julie

[stevedeshazer]

25. New to me

1. Never heard it

2. Rendered moot by #1

3. Gotta know more now, have to read up

[salin]

28. read Media_Lies_Daily's post #4 - link to FAIR

nice assessment - of the coverage - and by default of the issue itself. It is really stunning that this came out. It is even more stunning that in the middle of their dance to war - that the US press didn't really pick it up, or when they did - covered it as a "leak" story, not a US trying to pull a J Edgar Hoover on the UN Security Council.

[lostnfound]

26. Yes - US Source - Pacifica/ Democracy Now!, of course.

(Why Amy Goodman is my hero)

It was covered at length on Democracy Now! on March 10th and March 11th.
March 10th: http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/04/07/0320244&mode=thread&tid=28

March 11th with Daniel Ellsburg: http://stream.realimpact.net/rihurl.ram?file=webactive/demnow/dn20030311.ra&start=54:06.8

I think she had it on briefly at least one more time.

[salin]

29. hard work going on locally to get Democracy Now! on the air

she really does good work. Thanks for the links.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

30. CBS news covered it and the archive is still active

I bookmarked the thread on old DU here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=16741&forum=DCForumID61&archive=

Two more related threads from old DU:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=16537&forum=DCForumID61

http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=16715&forum=DCForumID61#2

[dpibel]

31. Yes; Don't recall; Haven't seen it since n/t

[jpgray]

32. Yes, I recall hearing of this earlier

It was dropped like the hottest spud that has ever existed.

[Gloria]

33. Your three items are exactly how I remember it, too....

....I agree, this should be more widely known....but it won't be, because nothing these people do that is immoral or illegal ever gets reported here in the US

[Silverhair]

35. Because only the left cares about that story.

The right certainly isn't going to push the story. The center doesn't care. They acorrectly assume that we are spying on everyabody anyway and don't care. Only the left cares about this particular issue. Therefore, except in the extreme leftist press, the story dies.

Just like the Tigerforce. Just like the CIA spy leak story. Just like a bunch of other stories.

[Terwilliger]

36. that's right

America is full of stupid idiots that don't have a clue about what's going on around them

[Andyjunction]

37. amazing

I don't think there's anything these bastards can't get away with. :puke:

[janx]

38. To answer your questions:

1. Yes, definitely
2. Mentioned in overseas press, but I believe it was mentioned in passing on cable news (only in passing) when the story broke. This was in light of UN coverage on cable.
3. I have not heard anything related to this story until now.

[beevul]

39. Media_Lies_Daily

Media_Lies_Daily:

Your name says it all, better than I ever could.

A lie by omission is STILL a lie.

Truly disgusting.

Free press.......BULLSH_T!!!!