"Hutton decided that the government was entirely justified in meddling with the September dossier, because the dossier was for public consumption. Clearly his lordship has no greater opinion of the unwashed British public than he has, more specifically, of journalists. He did not go into detail about the nature of the changes made to that dossier at the behest of Alastair Campbell who, in a break with tradition, was allowed to chair meetings of the intelligence staff. We might direct his lordship's attention to the way in which the very title of the document was changed. Originally it was entitled 'Iraq's Programmes for Weapons of Mass Destruction', which had the whiff of accuracy about it. Later it became 'Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction' as if they already had them and were about to use them; which is, of course, what the government wished us to believe. "
The great Whitewash Ron Liddle
|
HEY BLAIRBOY !!
Where are the WMD?
|
what is 'intelligence'?
Is it FACT?
or...is it action based on information.
[real] [fabricated] [transmitted] [received]
|
"The bleak future for British journalism" portends darkness for journalists everywhere - the threat to the last great open platform for hard investigative reporting. And frankly, it's a worrisome day for me. I'm not a disinterested by-stander. My most important investigations, all but banned from US airwaves, were developed and broadcast by BBC Newsnight, reporter Watts' program. "
Greg Palast BBC At War
Hutton report threat to press freedom - critics
|
|
|
The insanity put simply: chronology
|
Government releases dossier which stated that Iraq could attack
the UK within 45 minutes,
|
hinting at Kelly being the source of dossier intelligence
in an underhand manner.
|
BIG SUPRISE! :
No WMD's have been found in Iraq...
David Kay chief CIA weapons inspector admits all intelligence wrong...
|
|
|
WRONG... OR MADE UP?
you see - this is what it is all about...
Intelligence is now to be seen as 'wrong'
- NOT invented?
The war was ALL a BIG mistake...???
DON'T MAKE ME LAUGH...!
|
Lord Hutton say's
"The desire of the prime minister to have a dossier which, while consistent with the available intelligence, was as strong as
possible in relation to the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's WMD, may have subconsciously influenced Mr
Scarlett and the other members of the JIC to make the wording of the dossier somewhat stronger than it would
have been if it had been contained in a normal JIC assessment"
Hutton report
Scott Ritter say's
"A review of testimony submitted to the inquiry elicits a single reference to Operation Rockingham, a secretive intelligence activity buried inside the Defence Intelligence Staff, which dealt with Iraqi WMD and activities of the UN special commission (Unscom). This acknowledged that Rockingham managed the interaction between David Kelly, the weapons expert whose suicide led to the Hutton inquiry, and the UN. But Lord Hutton dug no further into this. If he had, some interesting insight would have been provided on several issues of concern, including the possibility of the "shaping" of UN intelligence data by Rockingham to serve the policy objectives of its masters in the Foreign Office and the joint intelligence committee. "
'The public must look to what is missing from the report'
|
|
|
|
"the politicisation of the security services has been one of the darkest aspects of this whole affair." Ron Liddle
|
Facing facts: All Countries Have become Companies.
What job do the intelligance agencies do?
who do they ultimately serve? US?
NOT ON THIS EVIDENCE...
Is there a dividing line between Military, economic and industrial espionage?
or has it, over the years, become as blurred as corporation and state?
Update: The coroner and David Kelly
Politics is national is strategic is geographic is industrial is economic is corporate is global
|
More Suprises...NOT!
the politicization of intelligence continues...
John Scarlett - former head of the Joint intelligence commitee
with major part in the spin - IS PROMOTED TO HEAD of the Secret Intelligence services
"Blair strongly defended the appointment, describing Mr Scarlett as "a fine public servant who has served Conservative and Labour governments over many, many years". He added: "I think it is unfortunate if it gets embroiled in party politics, or people try to make political capital out of it."
Downing Street said yesterday that Mr Scarlett was appointed to the post of "C" - for Chief, the official title of the head of MI6 - on the recommendation of a panel chaired by the prime minister's security and intelligence coordinator, Sir David Omand. "
John Scarlet New head of MI6
|
|
|
| or is he?...
Revealed: Government witnesses knew September dossier was unsafe - but did not tell Hutton.
Crucial doubts about Iraq's ability to produce chemical weapons were withheld from two inquiries which examined the Government's case for war.
Lord Hutton's investigation into the death of David Kelly and Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee, which monitors the intelligence services, were not told that information which helped Tony Blair claim that Saddam Hussein posed a "serious and current" threat had already been discredited and withdrawn by MI6.
The disclosure put new pressure on John Scarlett, the former chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC), who is being urged to resign from his new post as head of MI6 following the criticism of the pre-war intelligence in the Butler report published on Wednesday.
Three out of five key sources for the most sensational claims in the Government's September 2002 dossier on Iraqi weapons proved to be so untrustworthy that MI6 (the Secret Intelligence Service) officially withdrew their contributions. According to paragraph 405 of the Butler report, "in July 2003 ... SIS withdrew the two reports [about ongoing production of chemical weapons] because the sourcing chain had by then been discredited". The Hutton inquiry began taking evidence in August 2003.
The withdrawals fatally undermine the case for war and would undoubtedly have had a significant bearing on the Hutton report. But they were not revealed to Lord Hutton by any of the government witnesses, who included Mr Blair, Geoff Hoon, the Secretary of State for Defence, Mr Scarlett, and Sir Richard Dearlove, the outgoing head of MI6. All stood by the claims in the dossier, although it is not clear how many were aware that the intelligence had been withdrawn. - Truthout
|
I made this part before the report came out I know it will be a whitewash! [how Orwellian]
|
The Butler inquiry
If you don't succeed in brainwashing the public the first time... try try again
What the Butler report didn't see!
In January Lord Hutton's inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly cleared the government of inserting material against the wishes of the intelligence community in its dossier on Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction.
But the new inquiry has looked at the quality of the intelligence used to justify the case for war.
It may [!!!] also re-examine the way that intelligence was presented to the public and MPs.
|
|
Among the issues the inquiry is likely to assess are:
The accuracy of the claim that Iraq could use some weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes of an order and how it was promoted to the media
The reliability of intelligence sources and whether there was over-reliance on Iraqi defectors
The claim that Iraq tried to obtain uranium from Niger, something disavowed by the International Atomic Weapons Authority (IAEA)
Whether there was political pressure on Joint Intelligence Committee chairman John Scarlett.
BBC
|
Butler acts to prevent PM 'spinning' his report
12 July 2004
Lord Butler is to head off any attempt by Tony Blair to "spin" the conclusions of his report on the handling of intelligence before the Iraq war by speaking live before the Prime Minister makes his statement to the House of Commons.
In an attempt to stop Downing Street quoting selectively from the document, Lord Butler of Brockwell plans to seize the initiative by publishing his conclusions before Mr Blair has a chance to comment on the report publicly.
Downing Street is bracing itself for some criticism of the way the Government handled the intelligence, but it does not believe the conclusions will be devastating. A No 10 source said the Butler report, to be published on Wednesday, would generate "choppy waters", nothing more.
"Obviously there are going to be some criticisms that we will have to address," the source said. "The mood is not the same as it was pre-Hutton."
Mr Blair is expected to make a statement to MPs about the report an hour after Lord Butler's press conference and will receive a copy of the report 24 hours in advance.
independant
the above is blatent dis-info - the report was given to PM Blair early in order to give him the advantage in the House of Commons debate
|
Lord Butler: the ultimate British establishment insider
LONDON (AFP) Jul 11, 2004
Lord Robin Butler, who will this week present a potentially devastating report into British pre-war intelligence on Iraq's weapons, is a man who spent his entire career attempting to smooth the business of government, not disrupt it.
During 37 years in public administration, Butler rose to become perhaps the ultimate establishment insider, eventually serving as head of the civil service under three different prime ministers.
The last of these was current premier Tony Blair, whose government could be dealt a severe blow should Butler report on Wednesday that it relied upon -- or worse, encouraged -- misleading information about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.
When he was appointed to lead the inquiry in February, Butler, now 66, was dismissed by some critics as being far too much of an unctuous mandarin to criticise ministers with any independence.
His background undoubtedly offers evidence for such a view.
space war
|
|
Review of Intelligence on WMD
|
Jack Straw, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs announced the establishment of the Review in a statement to the House of Commons on 3 February. The terms of reference are as follows:
To investigate the intelligence coverage available on WMD programmes of countries of concern and on the global trade in WMD, taking into account what is now known about these programmes.
As part of this work, to investigate the accuracy of intelligence on Iraqi WMD up to March 2003, and to examine any discrepancies between the intelligence gathered, evaluated and used by the Government before the conflict, and between that intelligence and what has been discovered by the Iraq Survey Group since the end of the conflict.
To make recommendations to the Prime Minister for the future on the gathering, evaluation and use of intelligence on WMD, in the light of the difficulties of operating in countries of concern.
|
|
|
Serious flaws in Iraq Intelligence
Iraq didn't have weapons ready
Mistake for JIC to claim authorship of Dossier
JIC neutrality compromised - must be independant
Evidence gathered from untried agents
NO link between Saddam & Al queda
Dossier language misleading
No deliberate misleading
Dossier at 'limits' of Intelligence [made up!]
|
No direct blames for failures
45 min claim incoreects as used
Scarlett should not resign - WHY NOT??
Uranium from Niger based on good intelligence
[A LIE the senate committee in the US has found the opposite]
Mobile labs do not match - not capable of producing WMD
Aluminum Tubes were for Rocket capability...
Scott Ritters testimony excluded from report
In future any intelligence from the JIC will be kept ultra-secret
|
LEGAL CASE FOR WAR
Before the United Nations passed Resolution 1441 urging Saddam to cooperate with weapons inspectors, the government's top lawyer, Attorney-General Lord Goldsmith, ruled there was no justification for war on the grounds of self-defence or imminent threat.
After 1441 was adopted, there was disagreement within the Foreign Office as to whether a further resolution would be needed to authorise military action but Goldsmith eventually ruled that the legal case was already in place.
Key findings from UK Iraq intelligence report
|
Once again another peer, Lord Butler, whitewashes over
the blatent misuse and fabrication of intelligence
and comes to the unbelievable conclusion that no one is to blame!!!
Lord Butler also suggested that because of 911 and the US axis of evil
speech that Iraq became a target. He states that because of these factors
intelligence was gathered to enhance the possibility of War in Iraq
He also says that WMD may still be found...
This sets a dangerous precedent...
Now any spurious and invented information can be justified
and used to go to war without fear of repremand...
Question: who is next?
WWIV- coming soon? |
Blair goes into overdrive: uses report to spin yet more war aims :
rough quotations; House of commons - 14th July 2004
"had became convinced after the 11 September attacks that a stand had to be taken against potential threats and "the place to make that stand was Iraq".
The report provides an invaluable analysis of the general threat in respect of weapons of mass destruction and the potential acquisition of WMD by terrorists. Although it devotes much of its analysis to Iraq, it also goes into detail on the WMD threat posed by Iran, Libya, North Korea and A.Q. Khan. Some of the intelligence disclosed is made available for the first time and gives some insight into the reasons for the judgments that I and other Ministers have been making. I hope that the House will understand if I deal with it in some detail."
"no one lied. No one made up the intelligence. No one inserted things into the dossier against the advice of the intelligence services...
|
|
A series of further assessments to the same effect was issued in January 2000, and again in August 2000 and January 2001. To anyone who wants to know why I became increasingly focused on the link between terrorism and WMD, I recommend reading that part of the report and the intelligence assessments received.
It is against this background of what one witness to Lord Butler called the "creeping tide of proliferation" that the events of 11 September 2001 should be considered. As the report rightly says, following 11 September, the calculus of the threat changed. I said in this House on 14 September 2001:
"We know, that they"
the terrorists
"would, if they could, go further and use chemical, biological or even nuclear weapons of mass destruction . . . We have been warned by the events of 11 September, and we should act on the warning."
[Official Report, 14 September 2001; Vol. 372, c. 606.]
I took the view then, and I stand by it now, that no Prime Minister faced with this evidence could responsibly afford to ignore it. After 11 September, it was time to take an active, as opposed to reactive, position on the whole question of weapons of mass destruction. We had to close down the capability of the rogue statesusually highly repressive and unstableto develop such weapons and the commercial networks, such as those of A.Q. Khan, helping them. Again, my clear view was that the country where we had to take a stand was Iraq.
By mid-July 1999, the view had hardened still further. The assessment said:
"There have been important developments in"
Islamist extremist
"terrorism. It has become clear that Usama Bin Laden has been seeking CBRN"
chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear
"materials . . . The significance of his possession of CB materials is that, in contrast to other terrorists interested in CB, he wishes to target US, British and other interests worldwide.
hansard
|
|
10 April 2002, House of Commons
"Saddam Hussein's regime is despicable, he is developing weapons of mass destruction, and we cannot leave him doing so unchecked.
"He is a threat to his own people and to the region and, if allowed to develop these weapons, a threat to us also."
24 September 2002, House of Commons
"It [the intelligence service] concludes that Iraq has chemical and biological weapons, that Saddam has continued to produce them, that he has existing and active military plans for the use of chemical and biological weapons, which could be activated within 45 minutes, including against his own Shia population; and that he is actively trying to acquire nuclear weapons capability..."
25 February 2003, House of Commons
"The intelligence is clear: (Saddam) continues to believe his WMD programme is essential both for internal repression and for external aggression.
"The biological agents we believe Iraq can produce include anthrax, botulinum, toxin, aflatoxin and ricin. All eventually result in excruciatingly painful death."
|
Flashback:
SPIN GENOCIDE
You're 'avin' a larf, mate!
|
|
|
Uranium from Niger: flashback
Inadequate checking led to false claim
The CIA first began looking into reports that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger in October 2001, much earlier than previously disclosed. A foreign intelligence service, which is unidentified in the Senate report but which is believed to be Britain's, had said Niger was planning to ship several tons of uranium ore, called yellowcake, to Iraq. The foreign service told the CIA that the Iraqi sales agreement dated to 1999 and had been approved by Niger's president, Tandja Mamadou.
|
|
At the time, analysts at the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Department of Energy considered the reports of Iraq's purchases of uranium from Niger to be "possible." Only a State Department intelligence analyst thought the report was "highly suspect," the Senate found.
The CIA first began looking into reports that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger in October 2001, much earlier than previously disclosed. A foreign intelligence service, which is unidentified in the Senate report but which is believed to be Britain's, had said Niger was planning to ship several tons of uranium ore, called yellowcake, to Iraq. The foreign service told the CIA that the Iraqi sales agreement dated to 1999 and had been approved by Niger's president, Tandja Mamadou.
At the time, analysts at the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Department of Energy considered the reports of Iraq's purchases of uranium from Niger to be "possible." Only a State Department intelligence analyst thought the report was "highly suspect," the Senate found.
How the CIA fumbled on Uranium from Niger
|
|
|
'Signed Hutton report raised funds'
Press Association - Tuesday May 23, 2006 6:53 PM the Guardian
Labour was facing demands for a public apology following reports that an autographed copy of the Hutton report was auctioned to raise funds for the party.
It was reported that a copy of the report, which looked into the death of the Government scientist David Kelly, was signed by the Prime Minister's wife Cherie Blair and sold for £400 at a party fundraising event last week at the Arts Club in Mayfair.
Tory MP Stewart Jackson has tabled a Commons motion accusing the party of being "arrogant and crassly insensitive" in "hawking" an official report into the death of a public servant as a "novelty item".
Mr Jackson said that he would now be writing to party chairman Hazel Blears calling on her to apologise and to donate the money raised to an "appropriate" charity. "I think Labour should admit that it was a very bad mistake," Mr Jackson told the BBC Radio 4 PM programme. "We are talking about an official report into the death of a public servant who was also somebody's father and somebody's husband," he said.
"I don't think it is appropriate that it is hawked around like a novelty item by the Labour Party to raise money, however broke they may be.
"It is an extraordinary lapse of taste and it is extremely insensitive to Dr Kelly's family. The Labour Party should know better."
There was no immediate response from the Labour Party.
|
|
