05 June 2006

Liam Clarke and Martin Ingram


5 June 2006

Liam Clarke is co-author with Kathryn Johnston of Martin McGuinness - From Guns to Government.

Liam Clarke, Sunday Times, writes:

You are performing a good service covering this McGuinness debate.

However I notice you are carrying a link (click >>here) to Martin Ingram's reply to my article. His reply is tendentious on some points and it is more likely to be accessed through Cryptome than independently. I'd be grateful if you could somehow include the following from me:

It s a regrettable blow to Martin Ingram's credibility that he attempts to refute my examination of his document by saying he lied to me about it. Of course he would have had no need to do so, all he needed to say was he couldn't comment. However I think that it is likely that he did tell me the truth as there was some corroboration from other journalists for his account. Whatever has happened he has now lied, either to me or in his claim to have lied to me, on his blog. That makes it very hard to take his word on any material that cannot be fully corroborated.

This is unfortunate because he is basically an honest man, he has been a good source of reliable information in the past and I considered him a good friend.

Other points on his blog are misleading and untrue. I do not have friendly relations with the PSNI my wife and I are currently involved in a legal action against them for raids on our home and our arrest under the Official Secrets Act. We brought a complaint through the police Ombudsman which resulted in several of them being disciplined and the whole force censured as Cryptome has recorded elsewhere.

He accuses me of sitting on the story that Francisco Notarantonio was allegedly killed to protect Stakeknife. I did not publish this because I did not believe it to be true, and, contrary to what he says, nothing has ever emerged to substantiate it. The Stevens inquiry never stood it up and the UDA, who carried out the murder, denied that they had been targeting Scappaticci as was claimed. Repeated repetition does not make something true.

There are other points I could make, but perhaps that is enough.

You may wish to post another article which I wrote and which I think adds to the McGuinness debate. Here is the link:


Comments: Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?