Open
Letter to Gordon Henderson MP
Dear Gordon
I wish to make the strongest of complaints about a recent episode of BBC
File on Four; I have included the preamble from the Radio 4 web site. This was
a typical one-side item from the BBC what could have been an interesting and
informative debate on the subject, turned out to be a propaganda programme for
the interviewers political view. When approaching subject like the one below it
is the BBC job to remain totally neutral considering the taxpayer pays them for.
Let me give an example a Solicitor for a Moslem who is Guantanamo Bay Prison
who claims he is innocent stated in a lengthy interview that US Troops tortured
her client in a horrific manner and British Government agents witnessed this.
The Interviewer at no time did she question the accuracy of this account. I for
one would have the question did anyone witness this? Were there any
photographs? Were there any video recordings? The simple fact is that this man
and his solicitor are making the accusation; it is in their interest to make
accusations like this. Now I do not whether it is true or not but the point is
this Solicitor has gained a lot of free publicity, knowing full well the
government agency can not come forward to answer these spurious remarks. Another
incident was a man said that his telephone had been bugged and British
Intelligence was using his information. He complained to the IPS and was asked
what proof he had of this, his answer was NONE, so how can he complain just
because he imagined somebody was listening to him. He should have gone a Physiatrist
rather then the IPS but why did the BBC allow him to make such accusation?
I had hoped to listen to an interesting debate all I heard once again the
BBC supporting the breakdown of our intelligence service
I have forwarded this a complaint to the BBC but doubt if I will get any
response
FILE ON FOUR
Secrecy and Surveillance
AVAILABILITY:
7 DAYS LEFT TO LISTEN
Duration: 38 minutes
First broadcast: Tuesday
24 September 2013
Recent revelations
about secret mass surveillance programmes have raised fears about potential
abuses of individual privacy in favour of national security.
With requests to
intercept personal communications data on the rise, just who is collecting the
information and for what purpose?
Even local authorities can now use
surveillance powers to track employees and monitor the activities of
residents.
So what rights do people have when they feel they have been unfairly
targeted?
Jenny Chryss examines the role of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal -
the little known body that considers complaints from those who've been under
surveillance by the state.
Critics talk of an "Orwellian system" in
which cases are shrouded in too much secrecy. The Tribunal usually sits in private,
with claimants barred from hearing evidence and with little detailed
explanation of its decisions.
So where should the balance lie between openness
and effective oversight?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.