Former Defence Secretary Ben Wallace has spoken out against the BBC’s Panorama programme, accusing the broadcaster of attempting to undermine his role as a witness in the upcoming Public Inquiry into UK Special Forces (SF) operations in Afghanistan.
In a series of tweets, Wallace revealed that he had been contacted by BBC Panorama producer Hannah O’Grady, who gave him 24 hours to respond to six questions related to his upcoming appearance before the judge-led inquiry.
Wallace criticised the timing and nature of the questions, claiming they were “leading and inaccurate,” with some appearing to be “straight out of a conspiracy theory.”
Wallace, who established the independent inquiry to examine allegations surrounding UK SF actions in Afghanistan from over a decade ago, argued that the appropriate place to address such questions was in front of the inquiry, not through last-minute media demands. “The right place to answer all questions is in front of the Judge,” he stated, adding that the timing of the BBC’s request seemed designed to “discredit me as a witness” and undermine the inquiry itself.
The former Defence Secretary also accused the BBC of being disrespectful to the judicial process, stating that O’Grady should submit any evidence or theories to the inquiry rather than pushing for answers in the media. “No one is above the law,” Wallace tweeted, stressing that he would be happy to answer the BBC’s questions after he had given evidence in court and had access to his original records.
In his final tweets, Wallace expressed concern that the BBC’s Sunday story might rely on “innuendo and gossip” rather than accurate reporting. He urged the broadcaster to wait for his full testimony and provide him with sufficient time to respond thoroughly after his court appearance.
The Public Inquiry into UK Special Forces’ operations in Afghanistan, which Wallace set up, is scheduled to begin next week.
There was a time when the BBC was respected by everyone, not so much these days.
True. In my eyes they lost their claim to be impartial a very long time ago due to huge left wing bias. However I do approve of their fact-checking service, BBC Verify.
I agree generally with that but after hearing on a report after the US debate about unsubstantiated claims by both candidates picking up Harris on her claim Trump will bring in a National ban on abortion ‘Verify’ claimed that wasn’t true his ‘manifesto’ says he will leave it to the States. Her claim is an opinion as to what will happen not a factual lie or un evidenced claim like dog eating, which is what Verify should be concentrating on, but in their overblown attempt to placate Trump and MAGA (just in case I guess) are bending over themselves it… Read more »
I would say the problem sit more with the politicians and the public at large as they more and more present their opinions as facts… I do think in the modern world we more and more have difficulty in distinguishing between a fact and an opinion…it’s damaging in a couple of ways…. it’s a big problem when someone states an opinion that is taken as fact….so a good number of people have the opinion that china will invade Taiwan ( including me) but that is just an opinion not a fact…it’s an opinion built on the interpretation of a number… Read more »
as a lefty i find them to have a very strong right wing bias, i think the truth is that they are an unaligned sensationalist tabloid at this point.
They may issue corrections but it never goes further than a paragraph, tacked on to the end of an article they’ll still run, weeks after it’s dropped out of the news cycle and the damage has been done.
In the end all media is there to sell to an audience, the BBC like every other media outlet are looking to create a sensationalist product that “sells”. the big difference between a neutral media outlet and a bias one is the the bias one will not look to sensationalise it’s backers in a negative way..
I thought “trial by media” was the modern way!
BBC \ Hannah O’Grady, stirring up s**t
Ben’s being targeted and with his much-loved presence on Twitter, his tweets regarding this are getting attention and yes there is a pathetic motive.
Another witch hunt …
Ben Wallace is very much missed!😩 So much passion and effort from him
He even engaged with NAFO (yes im NAFO) on Twitter
Lastly why are the BBC acting like they are the police?
The BBC? Impartial?
Not on your nelly.
Panorama, like the BBC news area, has it’s own ideology to follow.
That will include trying to discredit and undermine UKSF, one of this nations greatest assets.
To be fair, I enjoy BBC programs and support the existence of this great British institution.
Just stay away from politics and report news please.
#notonyournellynotonmytelly….
but unfortinately yes they are on my telly …but I only watch the news so I can vent my spleen and reduce my stress (same as CH4)
Channel 4 news? Even worse.
the whole of the biased anti Semitic BBC organisation should be reviewed. it’s use of the licence fee and how and what the money is spent on is a disgrace
Personally I think public enquiries should be treated more in the same way a criminal trial is ( not in finding one person guilty or innocent) but in the way evidence is given…the press should not be allowed to question witnesses before as the very nature of the question could impact the validity of the evidence given to the enquiry.
I never watch the BBC anymore, Radio 4 is on in my car, and that’s the only BBC service I use.
Very occasionally, I put on BBC breakfast, and it’s horrible, syrupy woke, happy clappy left leaning, dumbed down nonsense…. But only until I realise it’s on after the kettle boils, and I put on GB news….
The B.B.C. refuses to describe Hamas as a terrorist organisation. That is a signal in itself.
It’s time to de-fund the B.B.C. Half a million of us have done so and more should follow our lead. It can be done legally online using the Television Licence page. Sign out and ignore all the threats thereafter.