American-born Colvin, 56, joined the Sunday Times in 1986 and even . . . → Read More: Marie Colvin RIP]]> Marie Colvin sent an email to C4 international editor Lindsey Hilsum, who said in a blog posting that Colvin told her: "This is the worst thing we have ever seen and they are getting away with it, so that is what drove her."

American-born Colvin, 56, joined the Sunday Times in 1986 and even then made an immediate impression in the newsroom, editor Witherow said.

"I can remember when she joined the Sunday Times in 1986 and here was this glamorous figure who wafted in. She had come from Yale and had been a foreign correspondent in Paris and as soon as she arrived, she turned heads, so much so she married one of the men who’s head she turned," he added.

Over 25 years Colvin covered 12 wars for the newspaper and believed to the end that she could make a difference by bearing witness to people abandoned by the world.

"She was always committed to foreign reporting and has covered a dozen wars in the last 25 years and with an extraordinary sense of integrity, of a desire to tell the truth to tell what was going on and as she constantly said: ‘I want to bear witness, I want to tell people what’s happening’, because she didn’t just want to report, she actually did want to change things and she believed that reporting could change things an alleviate the suffering and in several cases I think she did achieve that," said Witherow.

In her final dispatch from Homs for the Sunday Times, Colvin spoke of the citizens of Homs living "in fear of a massacre". She wrote of residents begging her to tell the world to help them and to get the bombing stopped. "The scale of human tragedy in the city is immense. The inhabitants are living in terror. Almost every family seems to have suffered the death or injury of a loved one."

Witherow told Radio 4: "She absolutely believed you had to get there to report. She believed in eye-witness accounts, because she believed they dramatised them so much better than reporting what X said or what military commander Y said, she had to see it with her own eyes and report them and she thought this was graphic and powerful."

Hilsum, who worked with Colvin for years, said everyone had their own "danger threshold", but Marie’s was different to most. Over dinner in Beirut a fortnight go, the two discussed going into Syria and Hilsum said she felt it was too dangerous to go. She said Colvin replied: "’This is what we do, and she was determined to go ahead because she believed very strongly that it had to be reported’."

Hilsum told the Guardian: "She was that old-fashioned kind of journalist who would to be an eyewitness, not an ‘in-and-out, firefighter’. There are not many people who do that and you just have to look at her last dispatch this weekend to see the quality of the reporting, the compassion, the anger and also the objectivity.

"She felt reporting was important in itself. She would say she wanted to do it so ‘nobody can say we didn’t know what was happening in Homs’."

Geoffrey Robertson has said that Murdoch’s letter in relation to this issue "is full of errors, both . . . → Read More: Digger gets it wrong again…]]> Rupert Murdoch is not legally obliged to hand over evidence of wrongdoing in his newspapers to the police, contrary to claims he made in a letter to News International staff, a leading human rights lawyer has said.

Geoffrey Robertson has said that Murdoch’s letter in relation to this issue "is full of errors, both of law and history".

He added that the media baron was "ill-advisedly and unethically throwing away the shield that parliament gave to journalists in 1984 so they could protect their sources".

On Friday, Murdoch told staff that his internal investigations unit, which had already handed over evidence that has led to the arrest of nine Sun journalists in the past month, would continue to disclose material to the police because the company was "obligated" to do so.

"We will turn over every piece of evidence we find – not just because we are obligated to but because it is the right thing to do," Murdoch’s email said.

He said he would "continue to ensure that all appropriate steps are taken to protect legitimate journalistic privilege and sources" but warned he "cannot protect people who have paid public officials".

Robertson said: "Apparently, he thinks it is right to hand over confidential source material – including the names of whistleblowers – to police without them even asking. This is a breach of the most fundamental ethic that journalists must not betray their source and there is no law that requires it.

"On the contrary, the 1984 Police and Criminal Evidence Act defines confidential journalistic material as ‘excluded material’, which police cannot seize at all, other than in a few cases such as official secrets, when they have to get an order from a circuit judge."

In 1984, a delegation from the press, led by Lord MacGregor and including James Evans, the then-solicitor for Times Newspapers, and Geoffrey Robertson saw the home secretary in order to ensure that the 1984 Police Act provided a special procedure whereby confidential journalistic material could only be obtained by police applying to a circuit judge with proof that the public interest required them to have it. This doesn’t apply, however, if a voluntarily give their documents to the police or invite police into their offices to take what they want."

News International insiders have expressed concern that Murdoch’s letter to staff means that his policy of voluntarily handing over documents to the authorities has not changed, and it will continue to disclose sources in breach of the code of practice for journalists.

Robertson added: "What is so unattractive about Mr Murdoch’s behaviour is that he is handing over journalists without ever asking them, or their editors, or their executives who must have signed off on the payments, what they were doing and whether they were genuinely pursuing a public interest story. Any significant payment must have been approved by executives, and News Corp does not appear to have turned them over."

He added: "The real danger of this behaviour is that it is a blow to investigative journalism, which depends on the cultivation of sources. "Whistleblowers will be much less likely to come forward, however much they trust the journalist, if they fear that his proprietor may turn them over to police."

"Everyone seems to have forgotten that over 200 years ago John Wilkes went to prison to stop government agents getting hold of his journalistic material without a specific warrant. He sued the government and won a great constitutional case. He would be turning in his grave."

this is good

and this is mind boggling

President Obama raised more than $29 million for his campaign and for the Democratic Party in January, a strong fundraising month that put him ahead of the pace he set in the last quarter of 2011.  The month’s haul raises Obama’s total combined fundraising for . . . → Read More: US politics…]]> http://politicaltrivia.com/

this is good

and this is mind boggling

President Obama raised more than $29 million for his campaign and for the Democratic Party in January, a strong fundraising month that put him ahead of the pace he set in the last quarter of 2011.  The month’s haul raises Obama’s total combined fundraising for this election cycle to about $250 million. In the last three months of 2011, he averaged about $23 million a month.

Jonathan Bernstein: In most GOP caucus states, the voting is not strictly connected to delegate selection. If Santorum’s voters don’t understand the procedures, it’s very possible he could win the vote and yet pick up only a handful of delegates. Indeed, that may have already happened in caucus states he’s won, like Iowa, Colorado, and Minnesota…. It’s not impossible — though it’s very unlikely — that the popularity contest could leave Santorum as the clear, unambiguous winner, while Romney becomes the clear, unambiguous nominee. Imagine Santorum finishing with a five point edge or more in votes — even as Romney gets crowned the GOP candidate for president.

amendment later withdrawn when she thought better of it…

About time too.

I look forward to the outcome.

I am travelling by rail Thursday and will let you know how I get on!

Britain’s railways have been . . . → Read More: Rail bonuses are due only when the service runs properly]]> Justine Greening MP and transport secretary is to vote against crazy and completely unjustified bonuses for Network Rail executives at the company’s AGM this week.

About time too.

I look forward to the outcome.

I am travelling by rail Thursday and will let you know how I get on!

Britain’s railways have been judged worst for fares, efficiency and comfort in a study of rail services in Europe.

The report by the thinktank Just Economics said UK rail services were less affordable, less comfortable, slower, more inefficient and more expensive than those in France, Germany, Spain and Italy. Frequency of trains was the only area in which the UK performed better.