Skip to content or view mobile version

Home | Mobile | Editorial | Mission | Privacy | About | Contact | Help | Security | Support

A network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of important social and political issues.

Tower Hamlets: Has Andrew Gilligan been hidng some serious evidence?

maybeyouneedtohearaboutthis | 18.09.2010 13:12 | Analysis | Social Struggles | World

"..the public deserve to know some very important things about Tower Hamlets today which are not contained in Mr Gilligan’s Channel 4 programme of March 2010 or in any of his published Daily Telegraph reports and blogs...."

The crusader Daily Telegraph London Editor Andrew Gilligan has been 'hailed' by a blogger known to visitors of some blogging sites for his role in covering Tower Hamlets in the East End. Mr Gilligan was already quite famous even before his Channel 4 Dispatches programme on the same area broadcast in March this year. His only achievement so far has been the claim that he so exposed a Tower Hamlets Council assistant chief executive in that Channel 4 programme that the person was left with no option but to resign. What else has Mr Gilligan achieved? It appears that to date he has only generated a lot of hatred if the 'comments' appearing underneath his 'reports' are anything to go by. We think that the public deserve to know some very important things about Tower Hamlets today which are not contained in Mr Gilligan’s Channel 4 programme of March 2010 or in any of his published Daily Telegraph reports and blogs. With the knowledge of the true events and forces at work right now [which Mr Gilligan has left out, in what appears to be consistent with a pattern or even an ‘agenda’ which he may himself be not consciously aware of], society may even avoid some unpleasant repercussions and consequences including the waste of scarce public resource and conflicts in the community.


London
Saturday
18 September 2010

Mr Gilligan has contradicted himself from the start. Or at least he has published statements that have been contradictory.

He claimed, in the context of his assertion that the Labour Party in Tower Hamlets was being taken over, Militant-style [as made notorious by Neil Kinnock who had ‘fingered’ the grouping as it operated from the Merseyside area so ferociously linked by the Rightwing media with the antics of Derek Hatton, the deputy leader of the then Council there] by an outfit he identified as the ‘Islamic Forum Europe’ [IFE]. Chief witness in Mr Gilligan’s media prosecution was one of the two local MPs at that time in the East London Borough, Jim Fitzpatrick. As the latter was still in post as a sort of junior minister in Gordon Brown’s [soon to be outgoing] administration, that fact added to the appeal of the charge of infiltration being made. In the months since Mr Gilligan began his very noticeable project, a number of significant events have taken place in context. One of the events is the reported prospect – admitted by Mr Gilligan himself- that there may be an elected mayor in the Borough of Tower Hamlets. It is this post and the money that the post holder will have control over that appear to have exercised Mr Gilligan mostly about that aspect of the claimed infiltration. Originally Mr Gilligan claimed that the call for an elected mayor [‘executive mayor’] was very much traceable to the IFE in effect.

One of the celebrated phrases that Mr Gilligan has been celebrating about himself has been “secret recording/s”.

This refers to the allegedly secretly recorded clips which showed the alleged agenda on the part of alleged IFE operatives to acquire control of the elected mayor post.

So why did Mr Gilligan suddenly drop all references to the fraud that might – we stress possibly might if through investigated – have been found to have been used to produce the council, Parliamentary and the referendum results as dated 6 May 2010 in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets?


In the broad frame of references to that, Mr Gilligan also brought in the alleged links between the IFE and the still sitting MP [over the months since the Gilligan reports began to appear] for Bethnal Green and Bow Mr George Galloway. The ‘conclusion’ suggested by the facts as they were presented by Mr Gilligan was that George Galloway and his grouping called ‘Respect’ and the IFE were working hand in glove and not transparently, to achieve the object of infiltration and that a significant prize of a successful infiltration would be the office of the prospective mayor. Mr Gilligan then changed his approach to the notion of an elected mayor, immediately after the result were formally announced of the ‘credendum’ about whether the electors in the Borough wanted a directly elected mayor reportedly held in Tower Hamlets on 6 May 2010. The change in Mr Gilligan’s approach was noticed in the fact that he stopped accusingly referring to Mr Galloway’s grouping or to the IFE for having brought about the situation in which a referendum had to be held over the options available to the electors about the state of democracy and accountability in the Borough Council. In the dozens of comments that Mr Gilligan has published since 7 May 2010 about Tower Hamlets, there is no reference whatever to the original claim about the mayor thing. Instead, there is a plethora of positive references to the referendum and to the mayor thing.

Why is that so?

Had the morality, the ethics and the laws that Mr Gilligan must have been concerned for changed dramatically during the 48 hours before and after the actual votes cast on 6 May 2010?

Mr Gilligan has not explained the reason or the influence that he followed to omit the line of hostility that he had published about the mayor thing before that date.

In fact he has referred to the elected mayor thing mainly in the positive. The only negative reference to it has been the likelihood, in Mr Gilligan’s publications, that the coalition of George Galloway and the IFE might end up getting hold of the post!

Every other possibility around the referendum and the eventual outcome of the ‘call’ for an elected mayor in Tower Hamlets has been left out.

Only in his latest offerings has Mr Gilligan begun to look at possible irregularities concerning membership of the ‘Labour Party’ in the Borough.

So what has he left out that is important?

For a start, he should have addressed the question of the referendum and its conduct.

If he had done so, he would have found that he could even cite George Galloway as a ‘witness’ in support of one of his contentions about elections in Tower Hamlets.

That contention being that you cannot treat as ordinarily reliable any election that is held in Tower Hamlets these days.

And in the present context, elections also refer to the odd referendum locally organised as we have been referring to.


How could Mr Gilligan cite even George Galloway?

There is evidence that Mr Gilligan had spoken to Mr Galloway’s then supporters back in 2006, especially when as a reporter on the London EVENING STANDARD Mr Gilligan carried out a series of reports on electoral fraud and misconduct going on in Tower Hamlets. In 2006, just before the local council elections held in the Borough in May that year, Mr Galloway was the only locally installed and recognisable politician in office who made an issue over false voter registration and electoral fraud.

And that fact was made most noticeable to the public by none other than Mr Andrew Gilligan.

So logic, evidence and history would suggest that Mr Gilligan would have wanted to find out where Mr George Galloway or his supporters stood in March- April 2010 on the very same subject.

Especially so when Mr Galloway and his supporters were quite publicly going around making very clear allegations that the same irregularities as 2006 were still going on in 2010.

To make things perfectly clear, not long part from polling day 2010, Mr George Galloway and his grouping were allowed an extended airing on the main bulletin of Channel 4 News with that programme’s Cathy Newman filing it.

As if that were not clear enough, days earlier, a resident in Tower Hamlets himself who was reporting for the daily paper the Independent was quite seriously assaulted during his own investigations into voter fraud that was being alleged at the time.

So why did Andrew Gilligan pay less than warranted attention to those?

And why had he decided on 7 May 2010 and afterwards that the ‘results’ of the voting on Council candidates and the two MPs in the Tower Hamlets wards and constituencies and that of the ‘referendum’ had been obtained by fair, legitimate and incorrupt voting and electoral participation?

Had he decided that George Galloway was complaining about nothing over the malpractices?

Had the journalist working for the Independent too been chasing a mirage?

Mr Gilligan has not dealt with the issue.

Yet he began attacking the possibility that the IFE might end up getting hold of the post of elected mayor.

It is evident in Mr Gilligan’s Daily Telegraph reports that that has been his main concern. He has not shown any concern about or interest in the very public aired allegations of widespread voter fraud or postal voting fraud or abuse.


This conclusion is reinforced by the trivial language Mr Gilligan had used in one report before 6 May 2010 that he had based on a trip on and about Mr George Galloway’s ‘campaign bus’.

Why didn’t Mr Andrew Gilligan investigate those allegations in 2010 as he had done in 2006?

By all accounts the intensity of fraud and abuse, as alleged, had gotten worse in 2010 as compared to the polls held four years previously.

Could it have something or anything at all to do with the fact that people like the ‘principal witness’ for Mr Gilligan’s prosecution of the IFE in the media, Mr Jim Fitzpatrick has turned out to be a ‘fan’ in a remarkable twist of events, of none other than ‘Lutfur Rahman’, the target of Mr Gilligan’s crusading reports?

Is it also possible that Mr Gilligan had attained a sympathetic attitude towards the elected mayor eventuality based on his ‘friendly sources’ who were assuring him post facto [the outcome of polling and preferences dated 6 may 29010] that Mr George Galloway might not go for that office himself after all?

Mr Gilligan has not so far addressed this and other questions that have arisen from his inconsistent and as yet unsubstantiated assertions about Tower Hamlets.

Nor has he addressed the questions that arose from the very strange part played in his Channel 4 Dispatches report as broadcast, by one of his on-camera witnesses who was coy to name the “guys” that had bee allegedly “terrifying” some ‘councillors’ on Tower Hamlets Council belonging to the ‘Labour Party’.

The alleged “guys” were linked by the Dispatches programme to the outfit called “IFE”.

Yet neither Mr Gilligan nor any of his sources on or off camera, on the record or otherwise, has explained what that outfit is.

Is it has because Mr Gilligan has learnt that most if not all of his initial sources have now changed their stance and are ‘backing’ Lutfur Rahman?

Is this why Mr Gilligan has begun to create a distance between Lutfur Rahman and his ‘backers’

Is this a precursor to Mr Gilligan finally exonerating Lutfur Rahman and beseeching his readers and viewers to fall in line behind Lutfur ragman in the event that he gets in?

In the meantime, we can get on with the important task of getting sued to accepting fraud, abuse and entryism in Tower Hamlets

Is it so because everyone is doing it? And Mr Gilligan knows this to be so?





There is no public knowledge about the outfit in the East End.

What there is is a lot of insinuation about an outfit that is called IFE.

Ordinary political or community activities are conducted in Tower Hamlets by ordinary groups about whom the community are aware.

There is no evidence decade that could point to a single community activity unconnected with a SECRETIVE PARTY OR FORCE behind it in which an outfit called the IFE has taken part in the ordinary way.

As repeatedly stated by Mr Gilligan, the IFE is a grouping that in East London is jointly run by persons who also in the main belong to the management and control of the ‘East London Mosque’ and the ‘London Muslim Centre’.

So why has Mr Gilligan left out the fact that in ordinary experience, the ordinary members of the population in Tower Hamlets – of any religion or ethnicity – are not active in those particular groupings?

And that those groupings have never been cited by ordinary people in the context of the community’s normal democratic movement or of the campaigns?

Reading his reports or watching his Dispatches programme, there is no explanation.

Other than the possibility that almost all Mr Gilligan’s initial aims have foundered and that even Jim Fitzpatrick cannot resist ‘endorsing Lutfur Rahman very strongly’!

The only thing that apparently still irks Mr Gilligan is the possibility that Lutfur Rahman might have been alleged to have engaged din untoward behaviour in the recruitment of members to the Labour Party.

And on that, Mr Gilligan has found one single complaint as he reports has been lodged with the Labour Party.

Is that a bit too thin after months of effort?

Mr Gilligan will have to explain why he has overlooked serious allegations against others that have been made in Tower Hamlets over the elections and the referendum.


If he leaves these questions unanswered, the impression will gain currency along the lines that may be Mr Gilligan was motivated by a secret Entryist agenda of someone – or of his very own - who has decided to deactivate the particular output over the ‘Gilligan Channel’ for now!

There has got to be an explanation.

How else are we to accept as credible anything that Mr Gilligan has suggested about the wrongdoings of any of his named and identified targets so far?

It is up to Mr Gilligan now to urgently clear the heavy fog that hangs over his Tower Hamlets assignment up to now.

And he should start explaining why he appears to think that alleged fraud or dishonesty by Lutfur Rahman is more important than alleged fraud and dishonesty by groups containing dozens or even hundreds of individuals in connection with vote registration, voting and participation in a referendum.

maybeyouneedtohearaboutthis

Comments

Display the following comment

  1. maybeyouneedtorespondquicker? — Norvello
Upcoming Coverage
View and post events
Upcoming Events UK
24th October, London: 2015 London Anarchist Bookfair
2nd - 8th November: Wrexham, Wales, UK & Everywhere: Week of Action Against the North Wales Prison & the Prison Industrial Complex. Cymraeg: Wythnos o Weithredu yn Erbyn Carchar Gogledd Cymru

Ongoing UK
Every Tuesday 6pm-8pm, Yorkshire: Demo/vigil at NSA/NRO Menwith Hill US Spy Base More info: CAAB.

Every Tuesday, UK & worldwide: Counter Terror Tuesdays. Call the US Embassy nearest to you to protest Obama's Terror Tuesdays. More info here

Every day, London: Vigil for Julian Assange outside Ecuadorian Embassy

Parliament Sq Protest: see topic page
Ongoing Global
Rossport, Ireland: see topic page
Israel-Palestine: Israel Indymedia | Palestine Indymedia
Oaxaca: Chiapas Indymedia
Regions
All Regions
Birmingham
Cambridge
Liverpool
London
Oxford
Sheffield
South Coast
Wales
World
Other Local IMCs
Bristol/South West
Nottingham
Scotland
Social Media
You can follow @ukindymedia on indy.im and Twitter. We are working on a Twitter policy. We do not use Facebook, and advise you not to either.
Support Us
We need help paying the bills for hosting this site, please consider supporting us financially.
Other Media Projects
Schnews
Dissident Island Radio
Corporate Watch
Media Lens
VisionOnTV
Earth First! Action Update
Earth First! Action Reports
Topics
All Topics
Afghanistan
Analysis
Animal Liberation
Anti-Nuclear
Anti-militarism
Anti-racism
Bio-technology
Climate Chaos
Culture
Ecology
Education
Energy Crisis
Fracking
Free Spaces
Gender
Globalisation
Health
History
Indymedia
Iraq
Migration
Ocean Defence
Other Press
Palestine
Policing
Public sector cuts
Repression
Social Struggles
Technology
Terror War
Workers' Movements
Zapatista
Major Reports
NATO 2014
G8 2013
Workfare
2011 Census Resistance
Occupy Everywhere
August Riots
Dale Farm
J30 Strike
Flotilla to Gaza
Mayday 2010
Tar Sands
G20 London Summit
University Occupations for Gaza
Guantanamo
Indymedia Server Seizure
COP15 Climate Summit 2009
Carmel Agrexco
G8 Japan 2008
SHAC
Stop Sequani
Stop RWB
Climate Camp 2008
Oaxaca Uprising
Rossport Solidarity
Smash EDO
SOCPA
Past Major Reports
Encrypted Page
You are viewing this page using an encrypted connection. If you bookmark this page or send its address in an email you might want to use the un-encrypted address of this page.
If you recieved a warning about an untrusted root certificate please install the CAcert root certificate, for more information see the security page.

Global IMC Network


www.indymedia.org

Projects
print
radio
satellite tv
video

Africa

Europe
antwerpen
armenia
athens
austria
barcelona
belarus
belgium
belgrade
brussels
bulgaria
calabria
croatia
cyprus
emilia-romagna
estrecho / madiaq
galiza
germany
grenoble
hungary
ireland
istanbul
italy
la plana
liege
liguria
lille
linksunten
lombardia
madrid
malta
marseille
nantes
napoli
netherlands
northern england
nottingham imc
paris/île-de-france
patras
piemonte
poland
portugal
roma
romania
russia
sardegna
scotland
sverige
switzerland
torun
toscana
ukraine
united kingdom
valencia

Latin America
argentina
bolivia
chiapas
chile
chile sur
cmi brasil
cmi sucre
colombia
ecuador
mexico
peru
puerto rico
qollasuyu
rosario
santiago
tijuana
uruguay
valparaiso
venezuela

Oceania
aotearoa
brisbane
burma
darwin
jakarta
manila
melbourne
perth
qc
sydney

South Asia
india


United States
arizona
arkansas
asheville
atlanta
Austin
binghamton
boston
buffalo
chicago
cleveland
colorado
columbus
dc
hawaii
houston
hudson mohawk
kansas city
la
madison
maine
miami
michigan
milwaukee
minneapolis/st. paul
new hampshire
new jersey
new mexico
new orleans
north carolina
north texas
nyc
oklahoma
philadelphia
pittsburgh
portland
richmond
rochester
rogue valley
saint louis
san diego
san francisco
san francisco bay area
santa barbara
santa cruz, ca
sarasota
seattle
tampa bay
united states
urbana-champaign
vermont
western mass
worcester

West Asia
Armenia
Beirut
Israel
Palestine

Topics
biotech

Process
fbi/legal updates
mailing lists
process & imc docs
tech