Hello everyone. I joined up here prompted by my wife to add a few comments.
jimjams - no, the U.S. used WMD combined with a wholly fictituous link to Al Queda as their justification for going in.
Bloss - I have been sad enough to read portions of the report and have to say that the majority of people are critical not of the report itself, but of the findings of Lord Hutton.
As has been pointed out, Lord Hutton's remit was very limited and although he has kept to the facts throughout the report, he has made conclusions based upon those findings that smack of bias because in almost every case he has condemned the BBC for their failings but exonerated the government and the MoD for theirs.
Here are some facts from the report in summary.- -Dr. Kelly as a weapons expert had input into sections of the dossier and knew of its contents.
- Dr. Kelly interacted with other groups of weapons experts (including Dr. Jones) and knew that they had misgivings about aspects of the dossier. Those misgivings included questioning the "45 minute" statement on the basis that:
- It was a from single (reputable) source but probably he had been given the info. from another source.
- It confused chemical and biological weapons - the two being very different in threat and preparation required.
- There was no corroborating evidence, such as factories producing these weapons, storage areas, etc. to support the claim.
-
The dossier was an accurate reflection of all intelligence gained. Most contributors were happy with what was written there.
-
The dossier used cautious language to reflect the uncertainty of the data, such as Iraq may have this or that could indicate a source for weapons, (etc.)
However, Tony Blair wrote an executive summary of the dossier as an introduction to it, that removed the uncertainty and claimed Iraq was a threat, which effectively exaggerated the threat without changing the contents of the dossier. It was this executive summary that he used as the basis for his speeches.
-
The Intelligence community were unhappy with this and memos were sent to the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) saying they agreed with the dossier but felt the summary was too strong.
-
In contrast, Alistair Campbell sent the JIC memos saying the summary was fine but the dossier sounded too weak and asked for the vague language to be removed.
-
In many cases the dossier was amended as per Alistair Campbell's wishes, but where some suggestions (such as saying they had found a source for nuclear material) were simply untrue the JIC refused to change it.
-
It was this "misrepresentation" of the intelligence that prompted Dr. Kelly to go to the media.
Remember that the government portrayed the events as being them responding to a real and immediate thread as shown by the intelligence dossier, whereas in fact the evidence in the Hutton report makes it clear that the truth was very different - they were changing the emphasis (but not the core data) of the intelligence to create the impression of a greater threat as justification for their eventual aim of war.
- Alistair Campbell attended (and indeed chaired) some of the JIC meetings, which Hutton acknowledges was wrong and should be stopped. But he hasn't criticised the government for it.
- In initial interviews with Dr. Kelly the MOD stated that his dealings with the press were unauthorised and he could face disciplinary action.
- The MoD contrived to make his name available to the press by confirming it if they were asked.
- They did this without warning or consulting with Dr. Kelly.
- Dr. Kelly (it is believed) was of the opinion that his career and reputation were in tatters and that this is probably why he committed suicide.
- And yet, Hutton says although things could have been handled differently, the MOD treated D. Kelly "fairly". Did they?
Nobody (least of all me) thinks the BBC were blameless - the chairman was right to resign and Andrew Gilligan should be sacked for bringing the BBC into disrepute and as a lesson for journalists not to make claims they cannot substantiate, but Greg Dyke should not have resigned and it is simply unbelievable that despite the damning evidence given to Hutton, the Government and MOD came away completely cleared of any wrong-doing.
Remember too, that an unprovoked act of aggression against a sovereign state is against international law. That is what Tony Blair and George Bush did.
And now they are finally admitting that there are no WMD - well of course not, but that was pretty much known before they attacked. It was a smokescreen, nothing more.
According to Paul O'Neill (George W. Bush's former Treasury Secretary), from the moment he took office Bush intended to invade Iraq and was desperate to find the right excuse to enable him to do so.
Sorry for the long post and thanks for reading.
waves