|
|
Regolamento del cane da guardia - il dossier di Irak era sexed in su
Venerdì 25 aprile 2008
Il governo è attacato come “dodgy„ dopo che regolando quello critichi il senso in cui all'autore del dossier del settembre 2002 Irak si è stato conceduto efficacemente l'anonimato. Il tribunale delle informazioni oggi ha criticato il governo per l'assenza di tutta la traccia di verifica che mostra la condizione di scrittore allineare del relativo dossier del settembre 2002 sopra? Irak? armi di s di distruzione totale?. In un nuovo regolamento, il tribunale ha accettato l'ufficio del Governo? posizione di s che non ha annotazione di cui i funzionari o i medici di rotazione facciano? cambiamenti notevoli? al dossier? sommario dell'esecutivo di s. Le carbossimetilazioni liberali già hanno condannato questa posizione As? dodgy?. Il caso rappresenta un altro colpo al governo? reclamo di s che il dossier era il lavoro dei servizi di intelligenza, dopo la pubblicazione in febbraio della prima brutta copia, scritto dal dottore John Williams di rotazione del Foreign Office. L'esistenza della brutta copia del Williams in primo luogo è stata rivelata nel nuovo statista nel novembre 2006. In questa ultima libertà del caso di atto delle informazioni, ho chiesto all'ufficio del Governo per dichiarare chi ha riscritto il dossier? sommario esecutivo di s fra le brutte copie del 10 e 16 settembre 2002. Inizialmente ha sostenuto che la prova all'inchiesta di Hutton dal presidente John Scarlett del comitato del Joint Intelligence (JIC) ha coperto questa, ma il tribunale ha rifiutato quel reclamo. Scarlett aveva detto a che Hutton che lui e la sua squadra di personale di valutazioni di JIC erano stati responsabili della compilazione del dossier ma non dichiarasse che avevano fatto tutta la progettazione. Il tribunale dichiarato che è chiaro? quella sostanza cambia è stata fatta? fra le due brutte copie e suggerito che era terra comune quella funzionari fuori del JIC? può andare fino a proporre le forme particolari delle parole?. Questi funzionari hanno incluso Williams ed altro medici di rotazione quale Alastair Campbell, il governo? ex direttore di s delle comunicazioni. Il dossier? il sommario esecutivo di s ha incluso? giudizi? , che Tony Blair ha presentato al Parlamento come essendo? reso dal JIC solo?. I giudizi nella brutta copia del 10 settembre essi stessi sono stati rivelati per provenire da John Williams? documento. Ma la versione seguente ha incluso un certo numero di nuovi. The government?s inability to account for these changes raises the possibility that none of the judgements in the published dossier originated from within the JIC machinery. Campbell later had a further ?judgement? added to the summary, after the JIC?s oversight of the document had ended. This was the claim that Saddam would use weapons of mass destruction against his own Shia population. The Tribunal accepted the Cabinet Office?s case that it had no record either of who had drafted the summary or who had made changes to it. But in doing so, it criticised the absence of a proper audit trail, particularly given the significance of the dossier. In its ruling it observed: ?we are not very impressed by the quality of the record keeping? this was on any view an extremely important document and we would have expected, or hoped for, some audit trail revealing who had drafted what.? The dossier formed the basis of the government?s case to Parliament for invading Iraq. It subsequently emerged that Iraq did not have WMD at that time and that the dossier?s claims were expressed with significantly more certainty than the intelligence on which they were said to be based. The new judgements included the claim that Iraq could deploy WMD within 45 minutes and another false claim that it was continuing to produce chemical and biological agents. Both were opposed by intelligence experts at the Defence Intelligence Staff (DIS). The Butler Inquiry later criticised the government?s failure to make the intelligence behind the latter claim available to the DIS: ?The fact that it was not shown to them resulted in a stronger assessment in the dossier in relation to Iraqi chemical weapons production than was justified by the available intelligence.? Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Ed Davey told the New Statesman: ?The absence of any audit trail for the substantial changes to the Iraq dossier is perhaps not surprising. The government?s spin doctors must have known what they were doing was dodgy and would not be approved by the intelligence experts. No wonder they left no fingerprints.? NewStatesman source Have Your Say: Watchdog ruling - Iraq dossier was sexed up Please read our posting guidelines before posting. Alternatively you can discuss this report here. 2 Responses to “Watchdog ruling - Iraq dossier was sexed up”
Related News
|
Study takes step toward erasing bad memories Last post by Regina @ 02:53 PM Go to Forum
| Latest Topics
Pirate Bay triumphant as prosecution drops half of charges Last post by Regina @ 02:51 PM Ex spy chief says government risks "police state" Last post by Nostalgia @ 02:22 PM Activists arrested because of UK Indymedia secret IP logging Last post by Unregistered @ 01:56 PM Householders to be charged for each flush of toilet Last post by Victor @ 01:35 PM DNA left at crime scene could be used to create picture of criminal's FACE, say scien Last post by Nostalgia @ 01:24 PM UK mobile phone firms to sell data about customer activity Last post by Nostalgia @ 01:17 PM Nano Ink 'Tattoo' Could Monitor Diabetes Last post by Nostalgia @ 01:14 PM Can geo-engineering rebuild the planet? Last post by Nostalgia @ 01:08 PM Discussing a cashless society Last post by Nostalgia @ 12:18 PM  Email This Page To A Friend Latest Headlines
More Breaking News  Archive
|
The views expressed in the RINF news wire and newsletter are the sole responsibility of the author (s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the webmaster. RINF.COM: Breaking News & Alternative Media is Copyleft - Copy & Distribute Freely. News Forum |
Da Chris Ames |
Loading ...
This is deciet at its very worst it just proves that the U.K. government cannot be trusted as they knew fair well that too attack irag was ILLEGAL as one government cannot attack any country for the purpose of a regime change unless that country has directly posed a threat too the opposing country , and it needs a full agreement from the U.N. SECURITY COUNCIL for the direct purpose of a regime change and as neither happened the war in iraq is ILLEGAL . So in my opinion the false sexed up claim of the dossier that SADDAM had W.M.D. gave a ligitimacy to a war that was HIGHLY ILLEGAL and in effect could be classed as A WAR CRIME IN DIRECT BREACH OF THE U.N POLICY ! . Thats why in my opinion it is no mistake that there is no direct paper trail as the government in power at the time knew what they were doing and one day would be called too account ! .