The Irish News NUJ Chapel here sets out its Rule 24 complaint against Belfast & District

branch member Anthony McIntyre.

Rule 24 Discipline, reads as follows: (a) If after due inquiry, in accordance with the procedures and time constraints laid down in Appendix C, the NEC is of the opinion that a member has been guilty of conduct which is detrimental to the interests of the union or of the profession of journalism, or is in breach of the unions code of conduct or membership responsibilities
The chapel believes that Anthony McIntyre is in breach of the NUJ Rule Book, specifically Membership Responsibilities, (b) (i) under which members are expected to treat other members of the union and union staff, with consideration and respect and not to take action which threaten their livelihood or working conditions. We also contend that he has been and continues to be `guilty of conduct which is detrimental to the interests of the union or of the profession of journalism. Mr McIntyre has not made any attempt to substantiate his claims, either by contact with Ms Morris, the news desk, or the editor of The Irish News. He has urged others to disseminate his false claims. Indeed his articles have been posted on extreme loyalist websites and social media with links to the UVF, including the PUP website, Ulster News, `Loyalist Banter Facebook, and `Loyalist Peaceful Protest Updater Facebook. The article published by him on the Pensive Quill which appeared under the by-line of Paul Campbell implicitly linked Ms Morris with dissident republicans. Working as a security correspondent in Northern Ireland where rival sectarian groups are still very much in existence, this clearly puts her safety and that of her family in danger from loyalist. Mr McIntyre has been wilfully dismissive about the genuine threats to her life which she has received and have been documented and verified by the PSNI. He made no attempt to establish the veracity of his claims before publishing allegations that they did not exist. In addition, he has continuously attacked Ms Morriss character and her professional reputation. This member has stepped up his campaign from publishing an article about Ms Morris to writing a series of vitriolic pieces about her. The Irish News Chapel contends that in terms of consideration and respect, he has shown none of those qualities towards fellow member and working journalist Ms Morris.

Further, by instigating a climate of criticism of her professionalism and working practices through his libellous claims, this member has threatened her livelihood and working conditions. Like all journalists she relies on her reputation and it is one which she has scrupulously protected during her working life. As you will see from the nature and wording used in Mr McIntyres posts, the members clear aim is to render her unemployable. In addition, the scurrilous claims about her working practices open her up to the very real fear of death threats which have already forced her to take time off work - adversely affecting her career and potentially the ability to provide for her family. We include a number of examples of the defamatory and/or abusive comments which Mr McIntyre has written or published about Ms Morris. From `What Price Justice (sic), August 4:

While she, like many others, will find it difficult to believe what flows from her pen, I will hardly complain to the Ethics Council about it or lift the phone to a libel lawyer in a bid to silence her. I will, however, write what I like and call things as I see them. Or does she just lie to everyone, whenever and wherever it suits her at any given moment? Can anyone believe anything Allison Morris writes anymore?

Mr McIntyre is accusing Ms Morris of repeatedly peddling falsehoods - comments seriously damaging to a journalists reputation and hence her livelihood. It is also detrimental to the profession of journalism to starkly state `I will, however, write what I like and call things as I see them. No call or other contact was ever made to Ms Morris to check the veracity of any articles before publication. The chapel contend that this shows that the member clearly has no interest in whether what he writes is fair or accurate the cornerstone of good journalistic practice promoted by the NUJ. In fact it is clear that he wilfully ignores the basics of journalism such as checking facts and abiding by libel laws. The abusive and libellous remarks about Ms Morriss working practices continue in a series of articles. From `The Weird World of an Irish News Journalist [by `Paul Campbell], August 7

Our contention is that `Paul Campbell is merely a pseudonym for Mr McIntyre himself, a practice which he explicitly condemned in his previous publication `The Blanket.

One of those named in the article has confirmed to two separate people within the Irish News that he only spoke to Mr McIntyre about this matter and has never heard of `Paul Campbell. We can supply witness statements confirming the conversations if the union wishes. We believe that this practice of publishing this malicious article under a false name is in itself both contrary to members responsibilities all our working chapel members must stand squarely behind what we publish under our bylines, ensuring we are held to the basic standards of fairness and accuracy. This practice is clearly detrimental to the interests of the union and the profession of journalism. However, the content itself, which Mr McIntyre has again published, is damaging and defamatory.
Irish News journalist Allison Morris is some chancer. While having a brass neck is no bad thing for a journalist, Allisons professional practices would make even the most unscrupulous tabloid hack blush. The Irish News journalist hardly covered herself in glory when she interviewed Dolours Price at a time when Price was undergoing psychiatric care a t a Dublin hospital. Allison refused the familys request to end the interview because of Dolours medical condition. The family then spoke to Irish News management. When the newspaper reached an agreement with them understandably excercising caution in how it treated the story and only printing parts of it Allison took the tapes/story to her friend and former Andersonstown News colleague, Ciaran Barnes of the Sunday Life, who published an unrestrained account. As both a journalist and a human being, this was hardly an example of ethical behaviour. Allisons actions ended up setting in motion the whole Boston College saga which has seriously damaged source protection and oral history. But the Irish News journalist learned no lesson from it all and has continued in her own inimitable bulldozing style. After her journalistic practices previously drew criticism on The Pensive Quill, Allison went to the NUJ with a seemingly wholly made up claim that the criticism had placed her life in danger from dissident republicans. She produced no proof of this whatsoever. Indeed, the claim was so baseless that it was laughable. While Allison was claiming grave threats to her life, anyone taking an even cursory glance at the Irish News could see she was in no danger. She was interviewing both grassroots and senior dissident republicans and she was on the ground covering dissident republican riots and protests. No-one was refusing to talk to her, let alone threatening her life. Allisons actions led the NUJ to initially suspend Anthony McIntyre.

We contend its entire content and tone fails to treat Ms Morris with consideration and respect and clearly threatens her livelihood and working conditions.

Ms Morris did receive verbal abuse and threats from republicans while out covering stories. She has also lost contacts as a consequence of his false claims people were refusing to talk to her, contrary to his speculative claim - which obviously has an impact on her livelihood. The allegations about her interview with republican icon Dolours Price can only be designed to drive a wedge between Ms Morris and her republican contacts. Mr McIntyre at no stage contacted Ms Morris or the Irish News to establish the facts of the matter. These are that Dolours Price contacted the Irish News newsdesk to request an interview with the paper, which the newsdesk sent Ms Morris, as the main security reporter, to carry out. We can supply witness statements to verify this. Neither Ms Morris not the Irish News has ever received a complaint from the late Dolours Price or her family about the article, nor was any claim submitted to the Press Complaints Commission. Ms Price subsequently participated in interviews with other outlets about this subject, which we contend illustrates her willingness to talk about the matter. Mr McIntyre has not singled out journalists from CBS, The Sunday Telegraph, or The Daily Mail for such scurrilous allegations. However, he repeatedly displays a lack of consideration and respect towards Ms Morris and threatens her livelihood and working conditions by trying to damage her reputation. Mr McIntyre is famous as an opponent of the Good Friday Agreement and as such his blog is read by dissident republicans, among others. He is also well aware that loyalists both read and contribute to his blog and has links with a loyalist blog as detailed above. We wish to point out that Ms Morris did not claim that her life had been under threat from dissident republicans. She has made it known and has been verified by police and accepted by the NUJ - that she had been under death threat from loyalists. This was not a baseless or a wholly made up claim. The Irish News Chapel, which has supported her during this difficult time, do not find the threat to the life of one of our colleagues laughable. We contend that as a former republican prisoner and opponent of the Good Friday Agreement, Mr McIntyre is also well aware that publishing an article which described Ms Morris as `The PSNIs favourite journalist put her life in danger from paramilitary elements, both loyalist and republican. It is injurious to her safety and reputation as a reporter on security stories in northern Ireland to imply that she will betray sources to the police especially when such sources may have welldocumented violent tendencies.

From `I have a right to be angry, August 9 (written by Mr McIntyres wife and published by him with a standfirst we can only conclude was written by the Pensive Quills editor, the member himself ):

Carrie Twomey explains how it is for a mother of two young children to bear the brunt of what she regards as a malicious agenda designed to mask unethical journalistic practice.
I am angry as fuck that the subpoenas are a direct result of the pathetic and petty ambitions of Allison Morris who thought she could compete with the likes of journalist Ed Moloney and attempted to scoop what she thought was a story of his by giving her interview tapes to Ciaran Barnes and setting the whole Boston College nightmare in motion.

A selection of choice phrases from this piece, which display absolutely no `consideration and respect to Ms Morris, include:

THAT COMPLETE WANKER ALLISON MORRIS the bullshit of Allison Morris Allison Morris's bullshit I am angry that the incompetent idiots at the bastion of journalistic wankerdom - the Ethics Council of the NUJ - hadn't a brain cell to rub against anything to spark the sense to toss her harassing complaint at the start.

We contend that the NUJ membership responsibilities preclude publishing material describing any one, never mind another member, in such terms. We wish to stress at this stage that Ms Morris has never engaged with the member or his wife, but has continued to do her job in a professional manner and conduct herself as befits an NUJ member. The chapel complaint relates to Ms Morris alone, she cannot bear responsibility for the conduct of others and does not because she does not act as a publisher in any way. Further, it is clearly `detrimental to the interests of the union for Mr McIntyre to describe the Ethics Council of the NUJ in such terms.

The tirade continued from Carrie Twomey:

I am angry that in the middle of the fight of our lives, a landmark fight for source protection, confidentiality and free speech, this ... woman... who boasts about what a great example of journalistic integrity she is, launched a complaint to discredit Anthony, and to add to the stress we're under in order to break him.

The chapel supports Ms Morris as our member is merely trying to protect herself from continued libels and abuse and preserve her reputation. She is not and has not been following `a malicious agenda or engaging in `unethical journalistic practice. These are baseless accusations and it should again be noted that neither Ms Morris nor the chapel has written anything about Mr McIntyre or Carrie Twomey to prompt such personal abuse.

To make such claims about a journalist is clearly intended to do damage to her reputation and threaten her livelihood and working conditions by making people reluctant to talk to her or threaten violence towards her.

The abuse published by Mr McIntyre continues:

the malicious, lying viper she is

I am DONE with sucking it up. FUCK HER and the horse she rode in on!
Again, there is clearly no consideration and respect in publishing such remarks about another member.

The vitriol increased from Mr McIntyre and Carrie Twomey days later: From `Are you being gagged?, August 12:
Today while in a second hand bookshop I was contacted by a solicitor in Belfast to inform me that Morris was looking my home address. Unlike Morris, he has an ethics based approach to his profession and just does not hand clients addresses out willy nilly to any chancer that comes along seeking them.

The chapel contends that the line about `an ethics based approach is another blatant attack on Ms Morriss integrity, as is calling her a `chancer.
Whichever threatening letter arrives first, as it duly shall, you can see it posted on this blog or on another if the censors manage to close this one down. The freedom to write will not only be defended but vigorously asserted whatever the odds. Allison Morris will become a byword for censorship. And if prison is the going rate to achieve that it will be a price well worth paying. In this case silence is not a commodity that money can buy.

Again, to claim that `Allison Morri s will become a byword for censorship is another attack on her journalistic integrity, which threatens her livelihood. She has a right to complain about libellous remarks directed at her.

In a comment about this, from Carrie Twomey at 4:43 PM, August 13, 2013 Reply From Carrie Twomey
All either Barnes or Morris, or indeed anyone who has a problem or concern with The Pensive Quill, need do is contact Anthony to discuss it as was shown when Kevin Cooper initially contacted him over a year ago about Allisons concerns. Even the Appeals Tribunal grasped this no attempt at conciliation whatsoever was made before going for the nuclear option. Now it appears the only objective for them all along was to secure headlines to discredit Anthony in the middle of the Boston College fight rather than because of any real sense of grievance. We never respond well to legal threats, whether it is from Editors such as Noel Doran, who first threatened Anthony with legal action on behalf of Allison over a year ago, or should it be whatever libel lawyer chooses to act on her behalf now (I wonder if the Irish News is footing her bill?). I do not think many people would respond favourably to legal threats, especially if that is

the first entreaty made, which in Allisons case, apart from the informal NUJ approach which saw her request granted, has been the only form of entreaty made legal threats or being hauled before Ethics Councils. Of all things! Compounded with the bullshit she has spread to further her legal threats and sanctions, and the utter disdain displayed by choosing a football match over attendance at the hearing of her own complaint, is it any wonder her position is viewed with utter amazement - the sheer brass neck of it all? Just who exactly does she think she is? After dragging Anthony through that farce of the NUJ complaint, securing the headlines in the middle of the BC case, not bothering to show up in London, and now seeminly siccing her lawyers on us, any sympathy I may have had for her feelings being hurt is long spent. Seriously, fuck her. Shes no interest in resolving anything. Unless theres some other agenda fueling her actions, she just wants to escape condemnation for being the asshole she is. Well, that aint gonna happen as long as she continues to act like an asshole.

Regarding the suggestion that All either Barnes or Morris, or indeed anyone who has a problem or concern with The Pensive Quill, need do is contact Anthony to discuss it as was shown when Kevin Cooper initially contacted him over a year ago about Allisons concerns. The Irish News contacted Mr McIntyre to express its concerns about the earlier libel on Ms Morris. Mr McIntyre was extremely reluctant to remove the offending article and took quite some time to do so even after the original host site had removed it. It was the Irish News Chapel who contacted the branch which triggered the involvement of Mr Cooper and Mr McIntyre has indicated in correspondence that the removal of the offending article was being done with extremely bad grace. In an email sent to Irish News editor Noel Doran on May 29, 2012, which Mr McIntyre has published on his own websites `wiki dump, he wrote: Given his financial situation, Mark is in no position to engage in a protacted legal battle. He has removed the piece from his website due to the threat of legal action from your representatives, and he has requested that we also remove his article. As such, we have obliged Mark by removing his article from the blog, and we trust that should resolve your concerns. However, we do so in reliance upon your undertaking not to wax triumphal by publishing the removal of the article from our site in the pages of the Irish News, or causing that fact to be published anywhere else. If that happens, we will be compelled to defend robustly our original publication, which would only serve to defeat the object of your threat of legal proceedings. It is factually inaccurate to claim that no attempt at conciliation whatsoever was made before going for the nuclear option.

We are happy to provide witness statements confirming that both parties were left together for an hour-long discussion between Allison and Mr McIntyre on the day of the hearing in Belfast, during which she repeatedly asked him to publicise on his website Ed Moloneys affidavit re his March 2010 interview of Dolours Price, an interview conducted around the same time as Allison had interviewed Dolours Price. Mr McIntyre absolutely refused to publicise this affidavit. We believe this is because it would fatally undermine the claimed justification of Mr McIntyres vociferous condemnation of Ms Morris for interviewing Dolours Price in the full knowledge that his friend and colleague Mr Moloney also interviewed her shortly afterwards. In short, it would expose his hypocrisy and the sand on which his entire campaign of harassment has been built. We have supplied said affidavit for your information. ED MOLONEYS AFFIDAVIT: Case 1:11-mc-91078-RGS Document 5-5 Filed 06/07/11 Page 11 of 16

- 12 -35. In or around March 2010, I re-interviewed Dolours Price, giving her, orally, thesame assurances of confidentiality that had applied to her earlier interviews with AnthonyMcIntyre, and telling her that the interviews would be stored at Boston College under the sameterms of confidentiality that had applied to those earlier interviews. I always understood thatadditional material could be added to interviewees files and that they would also be covered bythe original confidentiality agreements. I then passed these interview materials to Robert ONeillat the Burns Library, with instructions to lodge them in her file. He accepted the materials.Signed under the pains and penalties of perjury.D a t e d : J u n e 2 , 2 0 1 1 / s / E d M o l o n e y Ed Moloney Case 1:11-mc-91078-RGS Document 5-5 Filed 06/07/11 Page 12 of 16

The chapel contends that it is both ludicrous and offensive to suggest that the only objective for them all along was to secure headlines to discredit Anthony in the middle of the Boston College fight rather than because of any real sense of grievance. We again point out that Ms Morris has not written anything about the other member, Mr McIntyre. As has been detailed to this point, her sense of grievance about his behaviour is very real and endorsed by her chapel colleagues who unanimously backed a motion supporting her and instigating this complaint.

His attempts to portray her as the aggressor in this dispute fly in the face of the facts and are intended to lower her reputation as a journalist, which would threaten her livelihood and working conditions. Mr McIntyre continues to push his claims about how Allison treated the Dolours Price story. From `True to their Words comments, August 14: By AM [clearly Anthony McIntyre]
And some reporters extract information, when apparently told by family members the interviewee is unwell and incapable of giving an interview. Yet they go and print parts of that interview. But seem to hold back parts for fear of being sued? "Who Knows?". Then the interview apparently ends up in another newspaper 3 days later.

It has been made clear to Mr McIntyre that his version of events is incorrect and he has no proof for his claims, yet he continues to denigrate Allisons working practices and those of The Irish News, which has more than 80 per cent union membership.
Mr McIntyres articles which are detrimental to the profession of journalism have continued to be published since the submission of our complaint to the Branch:

From `Invertebrate Journalism, August 30:

The kiss-up kick-down ethic seems to have considerable purchase within that particular chapel of the NUJ. I no more have to respect Allison Morris than she has to respect me. Unlike the supine NUJ chapel at the Irish News, I dont happen to think that is some sort of journalistic crime for which a member of the union should be sanctioned. Then again my views on ethics and those of the people at the Irish News would seem to be radically different and now seem to clash frequently enough. While I have a consistent put up with attitude to its views they seem to take a shut up response to mine. Not a very rewarding experience trying to shut me up.

Contrary to Mr McIntyres stated position, the NUJ rulebook states that `members are expected to treat other members of the union and union staff, with consideration and respect Again in that article this member denigrates The Irish News chapel:
Not only has the Irish News chapel prostrated itself before the Ethics Council it has also exhibited bovine conformity to what it thinks the editor/bishop wants, leading me to suspect that the virus of cooption has been cause for rejoicing rather than resisting. Just as under a regime of old style corporatism, the chapel has been co-opted into the church of the management.

He then includes a graphic with the text: `Management? All the way. Supine every day. The Irish News. NUJ Chapel.

Then he writes:
Is the invertebrate NUJ chapel at the paper so devoid of autonomous standing that it can think of nothing more progressive than tugging the forelock to management? Is it incapable of conceiving of anything more radical than slavishly exercising its self induced powerlessness against the journalist protecting sources and not against those who endanger them?

AM then comments re this article on September 2:

when you talk of comradeship in the NUJ, the chapel at the Irish News immediately thinks comrade editor. It is a characteristic best encapsulated in the UDM attitude of yes, yes, yes Ian MacGregor, no, no, no Arthur Scargill.

From `Reporting to London, September 2, Mr McIntyre conjures up a conspiracy theory:

Perhaps it is just my imagination but am I wrong to sniff the scent of collusion between the actions of the NUJ chapel at the Irish News who tattled to Dear Sarah, and the former director of publicity for Sinn Fein who also went a-squealing to her? Both letters were written on the same day; the former publicity director's in the morning followed by the chapel's a few hours later. Both were eager to point out to Sarah how I had said ghastly things about either her or the Ethics Council. And both praised the same council for having taken action again st me. Coordination, collaboration, or coincidence?

The Irish News Chapel can confirm that, as he suspected, this is just his imagination. He is welcome to question Danny Morrison about any contact with The Irish News chapel over this matter. We have not contacted him on this matter and have no plans to do so. He continues to make things up about what the Irish News Chapel is doing and to show no respect to fellow members of the NUJ: From 2nd NUJ Complaint Filed: As Sure As Day Follows Night, September 10:

In true journalistic fashion the underhand attempts at imposing censorship from the obsequious NUJ chapel at the Irish News will be shared with our readers.
* The Irish News chapel was following NUJ procedures in contacting the Branch Secretary. As FOC, Mr Archer was chosen to be the chapels designated representative as required in the rules. He enjoys the full support and confidence of Ms Morris and all members who have endorsed this action. Mr Doran is not a member of the chapel and has had no part in the chapels complaint. AM says:
6:58 AM, September 11, 2013 Reply

Don't expect the chapel there to know too much about anything. Its aspiration to intellectual greatness is learning to say 'yes Noel' in 12 different languages.

We wish to draw the NUJs attention to this message on Mr McIntyres own site:
Libelous comments will not be published. Do not abuse the Anonymous facility or your posts will no longer be published

The chapel contends that this message, along with Mr McIntyres long membership of the NUJ, including a stint on the Ethics Council, shows that the member is fully aware of his responsibilities and is not merely mistakenly writing and publishing what can perhaps best be described as bile. Indeed he is doing this in full awareness of what is expected from those who enjoy the privileges that come with membership of the NUJ. In conclusion, much of the content in his series of articles about Allison Morris and The Irish News is in breach of the NUJs membership responsibilities and detrimental to the interests of the union and the profession of journalism.