Feedback | 21 June 2003

Comment on Why was the Times so eager to do the government’s dirty work? by Stephen Glover (14/06/2003)

Mr Glover is correct when he implies that the settling out of court of the action brought by Michael Ashcroft is evidence of the government wishing to avoid the process of discovery and have their lies exposed. The fact that the lies have, and were intended to, tamper with the democratic process is of great moment. Is there no other process in the United Kingdom to further expose the matter?

The increasing willingness of western governments to descend to lies in pursuit of their will is not becoming a matter of public concern. I do not understand why. It threatens those structures that distinguish western democracies from those countries crippled by systems of government that pander to the suppurating side of human nature.

The Times should publicly apologise for its role. It knew the implications of its comments at the time and its cynicism quotient must have alerted it. It appears to have no pride in its output or respect for its glorious past.

The manipulation of information should be something that all in our increasingly complex societies should be wary of. Honourable people in positions of influence should regard it as essential that information that they have a part in making public, is correct as far as is possible.

Mr Ashcroft has been able to set the record straight. Mud will nevertheless stick to him. What of the great bulk of the population that is unable to do so. Small groups of ruthless information managers rule, not honour.
R English

Comment on Why the world would be better off if Saddam were still in power by Matthew Parris (14/06/2003)

How refreshing to see someone demonstrate that humanity, in fact, has the intellectual imagination to create solutions beyond stupid, limiting “ideologies”.