Quote from DT:
I then received a call from the D-Notice Committee — the organisation which reviews all stories dealing with members of the SAS and subjects of national security. Very politely, they told me that naming Sgt Nightingale would breach the D-Notice contract all newspapers have undertaken to uphold voluntarily
Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought the D Notice committee was long defunct?
Three years ago I was involved in an incident on an MOD facility, the details of which were leaked to the Press by person(s) inside MOD (probably for money) and was to be doorstepped at home by the Sun. MOD Media Ops were contacted by said newspaper on the eve of running the story and asked for comment. DMC intervened, corrected many of the reporter's so-called 'facts' and requested that I not be named nor my home location revealed because of PERSEC issues, inter alia. The watered-down story ran, but without me being named. But it made the front page of the Times of India, I'm please to report!
In this case I can imagine DMC adopting a more robust approach as a member of the SF community was to be named (with obvious & grave PERSEC implications) and a considerable amount of operational detail could be revealed that was marginal to the story. So the MOD are to be criticised for helping to protect SP and their families? Mrs N has decided to campaign on behalf of her husband, and she has had some sucess; but I do feel uncomfortable about the way this story has been protrayed in the Media, in part through her good office. I don't believe the SF community, nor the MOD has faired well as a result of this criminal case.