Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on Iraq

Looking at this makes me wonder how much the British public were misled on Iraq?
I fully supported the government decision at the time, but that was based they made availableon.

Comments Please

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/15122006/323/former-british-diplomat-makes-public-secret-evidence-iraq.html

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

It stinks to high heaven.

However I tend to be circumspect about these things. We went to war, for whatever reason, but we're there now and there's no easy option for getting out. We need to just crack on with it.

I'm starting to see how the run-up to war was a bit dodgy (to say the least!), but what's done is done!

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

As you say Doc the only thing we can do is gey on with it. however we need to remember the lies and sleeze at election time!

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

I don't really see that this article tells us anything new but its useful fuel. Those who were against the war in Iraq in its present form - without a 2nd UN resolution, without the support of other nations etc - have always been treated as unpatriotic, as if the seal of sending in the troops somehow authenticised the whole process.

Another interesting (to me) thing is that I have never understood why the IISS September 2002 report on weapons of mass destruction was seen as supporting the war. It is a very carefully worded piece of fence-sitting but it certainly didn't say that the weapons existed.

I suppose we are now engaged in the process of getting out of Iraq regardless of the fact that to do so will be a disaster for the Iraqui people. If we don't get out of course it will be a disaster for the UK government. Seen in this light, evidence which strengthens the argument for never having gone in in the first place, however uncomfortable it may be for the government in the short term can now be used to authorise our withdrawal, which will please the great British public and strengthen the government, ironic isn't it?

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

The British people were misled on multiple levels in order for a war to be launched on a country that was contained and which presented no danger to the west in general or Britain in particular. The revelations by Carne Ross are not surprising and simply indicate how the British Government used deception, lies of omission, lies of commission and the repeated misuse of The Official Secrets Act to further its ambitions.

Anyone who disagreed with this deceit or questioned any of the dubious evidence presented was immediately labelled as unpatriotic. Is it unpatriotic to fully support the troops who are in harm's way whilst utterly condemning our government for the lies and manipulation which placed them there?

RM

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

Has anyone read the book 'Biohazard' by Dr Ken Alibek? He was one of the Soviet Union's biological weapons experts. If I recall correctly he held the rank of a KGB Major though I think this was an honourary rank.
However, in his book he mentions Dr David Kelly who he recognises as one of the world's leading weapons experts.

Cut to more recent times when our glorious leader, Tony Bliar tells us that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction which could be launched at 45 minutes notice so we have to go in and remove him from power.
As we know (at least, it's what we've been told), there were no WMD.

Kelly gets totally discredited by the Hutton enquiry for claims that the weapons dossier was 'sexed-up'. Next we know; Kelly commits suicide.

Now I'm not usually one for conspiracy theories but anyone else smell something fishy?

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/kelly/0,,1002607,00.html

Discuss.

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

I'm not sure about the conspiracy side of this, but there didn't appear to be much evidence of a fatal injury and the paramedics at the scene were certainly not convinced. Whatever the truth, this is a very sad period in modern British history, where an individual was at the very least hounded to a premature death by a paranoid government machine.

But remember, there has been an election since David Kelly died and the same hands are still on the tiller. What does that say about we voters?

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

What it says to me is that the general public are apathetic and would rather sit on their arses and watch Eastenders and the X Factor than engage in something important such as politics. This is reflected in the ever decreasing number of people that turn out to vote.

When they do vote there is always the mentality of some for voting for the same party that they've always done and the same party their parents and grandparents have.

Very few people really consider what they are voting for and the effect it will have on the country in general. We still get the same old mantra of the NHS & schools which can drive people to the ballot box but the picture is bigger than those two institutions.

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

Jimmy Green wrote

Hutton investigated the death of Doctor Kelly. You have just turned events on their head.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3099378.stm

A bit of backpedalling is required please JG.

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

Thanks for the link. I'm unable to watch any of the videos at work but will do when I next get home (possibly after Xmas duies ). If there is a case for me to suck back I will do so.

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

Jimmy Green wrote

You don't need to watch any videos. The first line of Lord Hutton's Terms of Reference was:

Hutton Inquiry

Your sequence of events and cause and effect are a travesty JG. Suck back now, not after Christmas. Your posts on the subject won't stand much longer without your retraction. Those quoting it without contradicting it will also be deleted.

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

Hey, this new mod is a pain in the neck. No more posts from me.

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

I think the last sentence in your final paragraph says it all

in plain English we should contradict the it or we will be deleted 8O 8O 8O 8O :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

Between April and June 2002 on the orders of Mr. Bliar and his accomplice Alistair Campbell the Foreign Office began to assemble a dossier to prove the existence of WMD in Iraq. This was vital in order to help justify an illegal attack on a sovereign nation. This dossier had substantial input from Doctor Kelly.

On September 5th 2002 the dossier was re-written, again at the insistance of Bliar and Campbell. Why? Because the dossier indicated precisely the opposite. Saddam Hussein had no WMD and was not judged to be a threat. This is precisely what has just been verified by Carne Ross.

The re-written dossier was reviewed by Doctor Kelly and he disagreed with its contents particularly the 'imminent threat' allegations.

On September 24th 2002 Mr. Bliar addressed the House of Parliament; brandishing the dossier and almost shouted " The threats of Saddam and weapons of mass destruction is not American or British propaganda. The history and present threat are real".

We suspected at that time these allegations were lies. As he stood before parliament on September 24th 2002 Mr. Bliar knew that they were lies. We know know that Mr. Bliar took the British people for a ride. Every death and every injury to our servicemen and women were directly attributable to these lies.

The exposure of Doctor Kelly led to his death. In August 2003 Bliar testified to Hutton that he was responsible for the decision making process that led to Doctor Kelly being exposed.

The Hutton Inquiry itself was a peculiarly British cover-up and not many people realised at the time exactly what was going on; particularly since most media coverage focused on the war, Doctor Kelly's death and the forced resignation of the Director General and the Chairman of the BBC.

The Hutton Inquiry was timed perfectly to cut short a Coroner's Inquiry and this is how the fix was made. In English Common Law a Coroner's Court is required to prove a suicide beyond a reasonable doubt. Reasonable doubt. It does this by empowering a jury, issuing subpoenas, gathering evidence and requiring any evidence to be given under oath.

Hutton took over the role of the Coroner's Court with none of the checks and balances required under Common Law. The inquiry was finessed, witnesses ignored and secret photographs reviewed in camera. Eminent doctors who disputed the cause of death were denied the opportunity to testify. The coroner who could have convened a court within 28 days of the completion of the Hutton Inquiry did not do so. He later stated that he regretted not doing so.

The circumstances of Doctor Kelly's death were never investigated adequately and powerful people went to great lengths to cover evidence up. Hutton was simply the smokescreen that let Bliar wriggle away.

RM

[align=left]

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

He might be a pain (a mod has to be at least a bit of a pain) but he is also right and is merely correcting a glaring factual error.

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

Yes, it looks as if I got things wrapped around my neck a little.
Maybe it was Gilligan's report that I was thinking of and I will now try to find his report and have a good read, just to make sure. There is a lot of interesting stuff to digest and I want to have a good read of Hutton's report as well. (The boss won't let me have enough time on the confuser to allow me to do that just now)

Bergen makes a few good points and this one in particular...

...which is why I mentioned the book by Dr Ken Alibek which is an interesting read.

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

Thank you Jimmy for putting your hands up.

Some errors, if unchallenged and or uncorrected can be bad for the forum's credibility.

Inquiry into death of x predates death of x? If the forum drops a poster who thinks that CA needs this sort of post more than a moderator who won't stand for it, I'm happy.

Greenie wrote

No, only if you 'quote' without contradiction and therefore perpetuate an obvious falsehood.

Thank you to those who understand and support my stand.
Revisionist history can go in to Lil's where bollocks is spoken fluently.

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

Folks

Nothing has really changed since 1998 in the fact that Bliar is only really interested in being remembered as an Elder Statesman. He has always been willing to engage in war followed almost immediately by an election as he rides to victory on the waves of British pride. I sense the maturing British public have now become aware of this, but right-hand-man(job?) Brown will inevitably receive our rebuke as he loses the next general election with Bliar and the Wicked Witch being no where to be seen.

 

Re: Former British diplomat makes public secret evidence on

Whilst a wholly justifiable military action, did not Margaret Thatcher do something similar over the Falklands.!

This sort of tactic is nothing new in politics and certainly not invented by Tony Bliar he is simply following the examples that others have set before!