February 26, 2004


Britain spied on the UN during the build-up to war. Gnu Hunter has the inside scoop.

Posted by Tim Blair at February 26, 2004 10:16 PM

I sure as hell hope someone is spying on that nest of thieves and whores.

Posted by: Harry at February 26, 2004 at 11:25 PM

Spying on the UN. Jeebus, talk about your cake jobs.
"They're not doing anything."
"They're still not doing anything."
"Nope, they're doin' nothing."
"Hang on. I think they might be frowning...Nope, never mind. Still nothing."

Posted by: JohnO at February 26, 2004 at 11:25 PM

Is anyone really surprised that spies ... actually SPY on people?! This is what spies DO.
Why have spies if they don't .. SPY?

I'm quite impressed they'd spy on the UN. I hope the US has our spies doing the same thing. Bet we'd learn a lot and wouldn't have to travel that far. (Save our tax money.)

I wish some 'unnamed source' would release a copy of UN finances. I'd love to know how much money they get each year and what they spend it on.

Posted by: Chris Josephson at February 27, 2004 at 12:06 AM

Almost as exciting as spying on dead people at a cemetary

Posted by: Johnny Wishbone at February 27, 2004 at 12:27 AM

Has Clare Short been jailed yet? If not, why not? I know the traitor label gets thrown around a lot, but this is an appalling breach of British national security by a former high-ranking government employee.

Never mind it was done on national TV in a time of war.
Never mind the UN probably knew they were being spied on (they certainly should have).
Never mind she had resigned her position with the government (she had to have signed a nondisclosure agreement, anyway).
Never mind her motives (to further her political agenda).

Clare Short intentionally divulged what she knew to be classified information, and she should be imprisoned for treason.

Same goes for Gun.

Posted by: SPY at February 27, 2004 at 01:55 AM


This makes me all the more impressed with Tony Blair. Think of trying to run a country and a serious war effort, when your party and your government are infested with people like Clare Short.

As for spying on the UN, I’d just make up a macro that filed my daily report:
"Kofi Annan says he is deeply concerned."

More seriously, we should be spying on terrorist-friendly organizations, and the UN is one.

Posted by: David Blue at February 27, 2004 at 02:14 AM

This is *really* old news, folks. Google "NSA UN leak".

Damn right the US is keeping an eye on what goes on in that place- we'd be fools not to.

Posted by: rosignol at February 27, 2004 at 02:39 AM

To not spy on your enemies in a time of war would be criminally negligent. Hell, the UK spies on the US and Australia, so why the hell wouldn't they spy on the United Federation Of Third World Kleptocracies?

Clare Short is a vain and foolish woman - far from being the selfless friend of the underdog she purports to be, she is an overweening egotist who stayed in a Cabinet with whose views she ostensibly disagreed long after it was tenable.

Posted by: David Gillies at February 27, 2004 at 03:13 AM

I think we're on to something here. In order to make the intelligence that failed us in the runup to Gulf War II work better, LET'S QUIT SPYING ON EVERYONE. Then our intelligence would be ever so much better. We could just invent it to suit, after the fact. Also, no one could be angry about us spying on them because we wouldn't be, AND we would be making it all up. Perfect lefty answer.

Posted by: JorgXMcKie at February 27, 2004 at 04:03 AM


Not only that, think of the money saved that can be redirected "For The Children"®

Posted by: Dean Douthat at February 27, 2004 at 05:26 AM

The real scandal is that the UN is so un-transparent, we need spies in order to find out what's really going on.
It's mockable that Short should worry about people learning what she and Kofi talked about. Who pay's your salary. I have a right to know what's going on, and they should act like it.

Posted by: Half Canadian at February 27, 2004 at 06:34 AM

The lied, spied and denied!

Posted by: Simon Crean at February 27, 2004 at 08:16 AM

How high and mighty from one of the world's democracies and "iberators" of the Iraqi people.

The Vienna Convention is part of International Law. Why does US, UK & Australia have such a selective approach to International Law?

What faith can we have in anything these people tell us?

Posted by: Arik at February 27, 2004 at 08:37 AM

Well, Arik, among the few countries who ever make even a half-hearted try at obeying your precious "International Law" are nations like the "US, UK & Australia." But that is probably too difficult a concept for your tiny mind to conceive.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at February 27, 2004 at 01:34 PM

Yeah. And what's an iberator?

Posted by: ilibcc at February 27, 2004 at 01:59 PM

Hang on guys. I'm no fan of Clare Short, but all this support for the incompetent and dishonest Bliar whose idea it was to go to the United Federation of Third World Kleptocracies a second time is surprising - as though Cameroon's approval to get rid of Saddam was at all needed or relevant.

It was Bliar who first politicised intelligence, by releasing his two notorious dossiers, and in so doing did the case for war more harm than good. And bugging Annan was hardly worth the risk, let's face it. Annan may be an irritating moraliser, but he's hardly a terrorist or an evil foreign government official. Bliar shouldn't be that surprised that all three of these errors of judgement have blown up in his face.

Posted by: PJ at February 27, 2004 at 06:13 PM

Let's trash third world countries - which our ideology would otherwise eulogize - in our attempt to gain credence for our fucked left wing ideology.

Who cares? We're left-wing moral relativists.

And Cameroon? You can get fucked.

See ya 'round.


PS. I'm off for a latte, but don't bother me. It's quality time. For me. And the Sydney Morning Herald.

Posted by: ilibcc at February 27, 2004 at 09:00 PM