Thursday, September 17, 2009

Paul Foot Was A Jackass - An Occasional Series Attacking A Now Dead Upper Class Revolutionary's Reporting Of The Lockerbie Case

I'm reading John Pilger's anthology of investigative journalism 'Tell Me No Lies', at the moment.
Although I would imagine the feeling wouldn't be mutual, as time goes on I'm developing quite a lot of respect for Mr. Pilger; more eagle-eyed readers will have spotted his webpage on the sidebar. Although there are times when he goes way OTT, he cannot be faulted for either his sincerity or his directness; and those Brits who might care to criticise him should recall the observation made by Andrew Marr in his book 'My Trade', that Pilger was not radicalised by anything happening in the Middle East or Southeast Asia, but by the sight of poverty in the North of England.
However, there are times when he strikes out; and including the late Paul Foot's crapulous ruminations on the Lockerbie case in 'Tell Me No Lies' is one of them. They amount to little more than a shambolic collection of gossip, innuendo and outright mistakes.
I never saw Foot on television without a Jacobin's sneer on his face. As time passes, one came to realise that if his revolutionary struggle had ever been successful, he might just have been the kind of revolutionary who would have had no difficulty in ordering his enemies' execution; perhaps even do the deed himself. For revolutionaries like Foot, everything is political; one has to wonder whether his journalism was merely an extension of revolutionary struggle, actions undertaken to undermine and destabilise the state you want to overthrow. That's the only light in which some of this stuff could ever make any sense.
Example - In a 'Private Eye' piece of 29 December 2000 entitled 'Campbell's Soup', he wrote concerning the trial in The High Court in The Netherlands that,
"The three judges listened in near silence as Mr. Keen set out his formidable case. They were not so silent when Mr. Alistair Campbell (no relation to the Prime Minister press secretary, but the Scottish Lord Advocate Depute and therefore a government minister) argues that the case against Fimah should continue".
This is nonsense. Mr. Campbell, now Lord Bracadale, was Home Advocate-Depute. Advocates-Depute are not ministers.
Now this is a glaring example of Foot's incompetence (or perhaps lack of integrity - everything's political, after all, and there is no reason why the journalistic good faith of a journalist who also happened to be a revolutionary should not be capable of being questioned) that just jumps off the page. How many others are lurking out there?

2 Comments:

Blogger Martin Meenagh said...

Hello, m'friend

I keep seeing references to 'serious questions', which I noted back on my blog a few weeks ago. I also spent a good few years of my life pleasantly acquianting myself with (and earning money from lecturing on) studies of sundry murders and crimes. That's just to establish that I don't swallow the huge elephants of doubt conjured out of gnats that most conspiracists and psuedoforensic journalists thrive on.

You clearly know this case far better than I. Can you direct me to a link, on your blog or others, that broadly says why all those questions about Lockerbie are nonsense?

I'm not being snide. Mr Al-Megrahi was found guilty. I don't pretend to be able to pronounce on that, other than to note the basis on which so many people who aren't nutters seem to think that there is a strong case in his favour. I'd like to know more.

17 September, 2009 19:08  
Blogger Martin Meenagh said...

OK, sorry, I read your earlier piece on it again, no need to respond.

17 September, 2009 19:12  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home