Does the end justify the means?

It is becoming obvious that many people knew about the spin excesses of both the Blair years and the Brown period.

Guido Fawkes has attacked the political lobby for being supine - accepting and reporting the spun message which the government wanted reported, of knowing what is to be announced before even most MPs and playing down what the government wants kept quiet.

Many members of the Labour Party similarly have acquiesced in untruths, and in the behaviour of the attack dogs who were set upon fellow members.

The motive in all cases was either self-protection, journalistic advantage or a belief in the cause.

All governments, of whatever colour, clearly try to cover up what they do not want generally known, even attacking savagely those who leek, and all want to present news in such a way as to give political advantage.

So Brown and company are not unique in this desire, even if the ferocity of briefings against their own colleagues to destroy opposition within their party is. We expect politicians to behave like this. They, after all, are the ones who kiss babies and pop up at all sorts of events in order to increase their chance of (re)election.

But is the use of the state apparatus and security police to arrest and threaten a member of the opposition who is embarrassing them by doing his duty ever justified, or spreading malicious and disgraceful rumours acceptable?