From yesterday's Congressional report into the September Eleven atrocities... there was no link between al-Qaida and the Iraqi regime led by President Saddam Hussein. That'll be this week's proof that junta spokesmoron George Bush is a liar as well as a thief and a traitor.

There were so many moments in the story of the reporting of the government's selling of the Iraq war when No 10 could have calmed things down. On every occasion, instead, they ratcheted it up again. Even now, in the gloomy pause after Dr Kelly's death, while Blair is saying little in public, New Labour operators are charging around briefing in private, upping the odds. They want to get the governors. They want to get Greg Dyke. They want a new system of regulation. The licence fee is far too generous. Any attempt to link recent events to the BBC's future is little short of blackmail.

The BBC's prime crime has not been sloppy reporting or an anti-war agenda. Its crime is to have pointed the finger at gaping holes in the government's case for going to war to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction. If Andrew Gilligan had reported a single source to the effect that WMD were a threat, and that Campbell et al should have been more bellicose, would this row have happened? Don't be absurd. It is not the detail of language the government objects to; it is the whole story.

The BBC has done what good journalism ought to do: probing and questioning insistently - things that the government would rather not discuss. During the war it reported and commented about what was happening in the sand and cities of Iraq. It did not do what some US broadcasters - notably F*x - did, and act as a national cheerleader.

If you doubt the influence of the Murdoch agenda on all this, look at any newsstand. The Murdoch papers have been the most amazingly disciplined attack force on behalf of the government, savaging the BBC in identical terms. The Tabloid, the Broadsheet Tabloid, the Sunday Tabloid and its tabloid version have all used columnists, editorials and front-page splashes to pursue the cause. The attack on the BBC, orchestrated by No 10, has animated News International like nothing since its move to Wapping.

The stakes are almost as high. This time, with the communications bill soon to become law - even as amended - Murdoch has a chance of getting into terrestrial British TV. If he was able to curb the BBC in its funding and its journalism, shoving it into a narrow little box, from which timid establishment-style reporting and dreary documentaries were all that trickled out, he would be in business. He hates the BBC not because of the licence fee or its alleged liberal bias, but because it is popular and trusted.

Everything his papers are now doing is designed to attack that popularity and trust. Those papers have been intertwined with New Labour ever since it became clear that Blair would be in Downing Street. Blair wooed them, and from the first Murdoch, sensing a winner, responded.

Sun and Times journalists were courted and favoured with leaks, which they could promote as scoops; Murdoch editors were treated as visiting royalty when they were entertained at No 10 and Chequers. It is shameless, unabashed, and was driven both by Blair and by that high-minded socialist and critic of journalistic standards, Alastair Campbell.

Why do they do it? Murdoch wants media power and Blair wants reliable media support. So long as nobody takes journalistic principle or the public interest too seriously, there is a deal to be done. One day, if Murdoch gets his way, he will be in a position of terrifying influence over any future government.

Gavyn Davies and Greg Dyke have refused to play their allotted role as New Labour toadies. They know that they, and the BBC, have nowhere else to go. The Tories would privatise them like a shot. Now that the Conservative manifesto is likely to suggest slashing the licence fee, it is not hard to see a vengeful New Labour starting a Dutch auction, cutting and cutting. Then it will be curtains for the governors and the hunt will be on for a more reliable director general.

The excuse will be, no doubt, all those rubbishy game shows, pop quiz programmes and yoof channels. The assault will be muffled by high-minded essays by Peter Mandelson and Gerald Kaufman on the subject of journalistic standards - they both have PhDs in that - and numerous journalists who are miffed that they haven't been given enough airtime will go along for the ride. But no one should be in any doubt that New Labour is now deliberately menacing the independence of one of the bastions of British pluralism. This is a moment when the BBC needs its friends.

-- Jackie Ashley in the Guardian.

Elsewhere in the world... the Washington Post (registration, yadda, yadda) implies that US forces knew the "Hussein sons" had been in their house for some weeks before mounting Tuesday's execution... Protesters at the scene of the crime dispersed without incident after the Americans trucked in several dozen Iraqis in civilian clothes and armed with wooden clubs. They seemed friendly and their presence was enough to disperse the crowd as the call to prayers went up from the nearby mosque ... and this transcript from Wednesday's gloating briefing, where the US chief combatant described in gory detail how he had come to kill between two and four innocent people:

Robert Fisk of The Independent: The Americans are specialists in surrounding places, keeping people in them, holding up for a week, if necessary, to make them surrender. These guys only had, it appears, AK-47s, and you had immense amount of firepower. Surely, the possibility of the immense amount of information they could have given coalition forces, not to mention the trials that they could have been put on for war crimes, held out a much greater possibility of victory for you if you could have surrounded that house and just sat there until they came out, even if they were prepared to keep shooting.

General Sanchez of the US paramilitary: Sir, that is speculation. Next slide...

Mr Fisk: No, sir, it's an operational question. Surely you must have considered this much more seriously than you suggested.

Sanchez: Yes, it was considered, and we chose the course of action that we took.

Q: Why, sir?

Sanchez: Next slide -- or, next question, please.

Soon to be former British prime minister Mister Tony Blair is in Red China, evading questions about his role in fibbing about Weapons of Mass Distraction in Iraq. This is not a row about the BBC. It's a row about the Government lying and being untrustworthy.

Speaking of untrustworthy, the US claims to have killed President Sadaam's sons. The US has claimed on at least four occasions to have killed their father; none of those claims were correct. We see no a priori reason to trust today's claims. We also note that Mr Bush's poll numbers have slipped back to 50% approval, within margin of error.

On the telly tonight, Every Home Should Have One (BBC2), a brief guide into the history and development of household durables. It's good, but it's not a patch on Tim Hunkin's The Secret Life of Machines from about 15 years ago. When Channel 4 gets its factual channel later in the year, can they please please please repeat this show? Thanks.

The annual bout of nominees for the Merc:

• Athlete, Vehicles and Animals
• Eliza Carthy, Anglicana
• Coldplay, A Rush of Blood to the Head
• The Darkness, Permission To Land
• Floetry, Floetic
• Soweto Kinch, Conversations with the Unseen
• Lemon Jelly, Lost Horizons
• Radiohead, Hail to the Thief
• Dizzee Rascal, Boy in Da Corner
• The Thrills, So Much for the City
• Martina Topley-Bird, Quixotic
• Terri Walker, Untitled

Of those, I really like Lemon Jelly and Eliza Carthy; Athlete's is promising but they'll do better. Coldplay and Radiohead are great but they've both done better. Only heard the singles from The Darkness and Ms Topley-Bird, both are growers. Haven't heard of Mr Rascal or Floetry, not hugely impressed with Ms Walker, and Mr Kinch is the token jazz album. If I had to punt a pound, I'd be putting it on The Thrills at 10/1. Their album isn't quite as instant as Lemon Jelly's, but it's growing on me with every listen.

When faced with using explosive but highly questionable charges in vital presentations leading up to a possible pre-emptive war, both Mr Coelin Powell (the junta's foreign affairs spokestoken) and Mr George Tenet (palindromic head of the FBI, or is it the CIA) gave the information they were handed a thorough going over before ultimately rejecting it. But not Mr George Bush Jr (the junta's chief spokesmoron.) He took whatever he was handed, and spouted it up to the world. He was, quite simply, the spokesmoron, mindlessly speaking the words that others had polished and twisted and finally agreed he would say. When the truth came out, as it is wont to do, the stand-up comic decided that the buck stops with Mr Tenet.

Back on this side of the pond, no surprised to find the Murdoch media leading the attack on the BBC. It's a rival to his trashy tabloid rolling "news" station Wok No News; it's a thorn in the flesh of his Daily Tabloid and Broadsheet Tabloid.

John "Bruiser" Read, the Minister for Variables, has been awfully quiet since his early June claim that "rogue members of the security service" wanted to undermine and discredit the administration. Does he still believe that?

The MoD triumphantly said that the man who it claimed to be the mole was "lowly," of "little importance," and had "scant involvement." That's turned out to be bullshit: Dr Kelly was credible and amongst the greatest experts anywhere in the field.

A disaster of a day for ITV Sport. First, they miss the defining moment of the British Grand Prix. Rather than showing a man on the track and the ensuing slew of pit stops, ITV was on a commercial break. Viewers to the struggling station saw only edited lowlights.

Then The Monkey's coverage of the Tour de France descended faster than the riders. Live coverage of a climb mysteriously turned into taped coverage of the descent, with the stage win happening ... while the station was on a commercial break. Not good.

Over on the BBC, coverage of The Open golf misses none of the crucial action, because the BBC doesn't take commercial breaks. If you want great coverage of sporting events, you can't have commercials in there.

A quick update to yesterday's notes: Mister Tony Blair has no plans to resign, and the BBC has confirmed that Dr Kelly was their prime source. Not that this changes the veracity of their report.