David Lock

The BBC have revealed a confidential NATO report marked secret on every page about Pakistan/Taliban/Afghan relationships. If genuine then it is actually quite significant and could alter the West's plans for that area.

But do you think the BBC has the right to just ignore the bit where it says "confidential"? Don't they have a responsibility of respecting the wishes of an august body such as NATO?

David

JTaylor

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-16821218

David Lock

Which doesn't answer my question.......


The Taliban in Afghanistan are being directly assisted by Pakistani security services, according to a secret Nato report seen by the BBC.

d

TinyTim

iTrader: (3)

Fair play to the BBC... it'll put more pressure on the government to realise it's all a huge waste of time and force them to bring our boys home.


I can only hope...

ReallyReallyGoodMeat

Perhaps more importantly, how was it leaked? And why? Probably so the BBC would show it.

JTaylor

I wasn't trying to, Mr Lock, I added the link to aid the discussion. I'm undecided, btw. It's hardly news, we know that Pakistan are an enemy, it's been known for some time. The BBC are a news channel, so do have a duty to report and then there's the question of just how 'secret' NATO want this report to be; was it leaked deliberately? I guess I'd be concerned if it endangered our troops or disadvantaged the West in some way, but I'm not sure it does that.

dpb

Indeed Just amazes me that anybody would believe it was possible to 'rid' the region/world of them

Geezer

I think the BBC was absolutely right to publish. Something is only confidential to the people who wish it to be. Nothing would be reported it the media agreed with confidentiality.

Geezer

Tidgy

lmao, your not nieve enough to think that this hasn't been leaked on purpose?

David Lock

Interesting and I agree with most of above. Of course it would have been a different matter if the publishing the report had somehow endangered our troops and I guess the BBC would have had to judge whether to publish or not and that becomes a bit iffy.

And yes most of the stuff was known already but perhaps not to the extent detailed in the report.

And yes the Taliban cannot really be defeated especially as the population seem to go along with Taliban way of doing things. This is a complete mystery to me as parts of the Sharia Law seem abhorrent - how on earth can it be right to imprison, or worse, a woman who has been raped for example.

d

Geezer

Not at all, I was merely answering the OP's question about confidentiality and the morals of publishing. Hence the second part of the reply..........

Geezer

JTaylor

One of the most illiterate states on the planet and the 'literate' learn in madrasas. It's the reason the West pump hundreds of millions in to Pakistani education, we really don't want the Taliban running nuclear armed Pakistan.

Leslie

I would expect the BBC to be subject to the Official Secrets Act so they would certainly be in the wrong to publish a secret report unless it had been officially derestricted. If that had been done then the papers should no longer be marked secret.

If an item is restricted in any way, it is not for the BBC to decide whether they are free to publish it. That is the prerogative of the authority which produced the item in the first place.

Les

tarmac terror

iTrader: (2)

Having handled documents protectively marked secret and above in previous employment roles, this sounds like a typical headline grabbing tactic, if the document was indeed classified at secret, as the controls around such documents in physical storage or electronic storage are very robust, the secret detail has not been divulged.

This is like claiming you have seen a secret document where the last line read 'yours sincerely'. While accurate, it is not those words that caused the document to be protectively marked at that level. I would suggest that what has been seen is an intelligence report, which would be a classified document, however it is coarse grain intelligence which is speculative rather than any real depth analytical assessment which has been scored and assessed.

Trout

iTrader: (1)

I am not sure anyone was complaining when they were revealing totally confidential information on politicians expenses, or major corporate deals like Lloyds-HBoS, or bankers bonuses and pensions.


So do we have a spectrum of confidentiality?


Or is the news media responsible for publishing information that challenges the status quo - a la Wikileaks?

Trout

iTrader: (1)

Why do you think the BBC is subject to the Official Secrets Act?

My understanding is that it applies to individuals rather than entities - and typically (be definition) they are Crown Servants or Government Contractors. I don't think the BBC is either of these.

Leslie

Those who work for the BBC are individuals, just as all of us in the Services were! Those responsible for producing the programme must be responsible surely.

Les

Tidgy

im not sure what the exact official secrets act says as far as descriptions, calssified, secret, top secret etc and what can and can't be said. i think it covers the release of information by the departments not the publicaton of it if released

also its a NATO report so not a uk only thing.

Trout

iTrader: (1)

Yes - but they are not Crown Servants or Government contractors - they are the BBC.

When you are in the Services I believe you are Crown Servants.

Leslie

No one is entitled to give away state secrets. Try it yourself if you think so!

Les