SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: American Spirit who wrote (452896)9/5/2003 1:02:57 AM
From: Skywatcher  Respond to of 769669
 
UK Intelligence Chief: Dossier Exaggerated the Case for War
By Kim Sengupta, Paul Waugh and Ben Russell
Independent Digital

Thursday 04 September 2003

Iraqi weapons capability 'was not accurately represented'; concerns over both
content and source of key 45-minute claim

Tony Blair's case for invading Iraq was in tatters last night after damning public criticism by two
senior intelligence officials of the way the September weapons dossier was manipulated by
government "spin merchants".

Brian Jones, who headed the intelligence department dedicated to investigating Iraq's weapons of
mass destruction programme, told the Hutton inquiry there was deep disquiet among his colleagues
about the way significant evidence they had supplied for the dossier was altered. He said evidence in
the dossier was "over-egged", the language was too strong and there were misgivings over the
now-infamous claim that Iraq could launch weapons of mass destruction in 45 minutes.

The other official, identified to the Hutton inquiry as "Mr A" and described as the country's foremost
authority on chemical warfare, disclosed how a claim in the dossier about chemical weapons was
inserted despite protests from him and other experts. He wrote in an e-mail to David Kelly, whose
apparent suicide is being examined at the inquiry, that the dossier would become "tomorrow's chip
wrappers". Mr A told the inquiry: "The perception was that the dossier had been round the houses
several times in order to find a form of words that would strengthen certain political objectives."

The inquiry was told that the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC), which compiled the dossier, did not
even meet to discuss the final draft of the document before John Scarlett, the committee's chairman,
signed it off. Such was the level of unhappiness about alleged political interference that Dr Jones wrote
a memo to his superiors in the Defence Intelligence Staff listing his concerns a few days before the
dossier was published on 24 September.

Dr Jones, who recently retired, told the inquiry: "The impression I had was that on 19 September the
shutters were coming down on this particular paper. The discussion and argument had been
concluded. It was an impression I had at the time that our reservations about the dossier were not
being reflected in the final version."

Some of his staff were "concerned and unhappy" about "all aspects" of the dossier, Dr Jones said.
The chief chemical authority on the team - not Mr A - had particularly strong reservations. "They were
really about the tendency in certain areas, from his point of view, to, shall we say, over-egg certain
assessments, particularly in relation to the production of chemical weapons," he said.Describing
himself as "probably the most senior and experienced intelligence official working on WMD" - a claim
not challenged by the Ministry of Defence - he stressed the disquiet felt about the way information
supplied by his department had been used for the sake of political expediency.

Dr Jones's use of the phrase "over-egg" was yet another addition to the ever-growing lexicon of the
inquiry, prompting comparisons with the expression that has dominated proceedings so far:
"sexed-up".

Yesterday's criticism from the intelligence community reinforced the impression that the Hutton
inquiry has turned into quicksand for Downing Street. It also backed the BBC's original story about
disquiet in the intelligence community about the dossier.

Dr Jones maintained that important claims made in the document, and repeated by Mr Blair and his
ministers, were fundamentally flawed.

He pointed out the weaknesses in the claim that Saddam Hussein could launch chemical and
biological attacks within 45 minutes. He said that while the JIC insisted that the 45-minutes claim
came from a reliable agent, he had only obtained the information from a second-hand source in Iraq.
He said the source did not appear to "know very much about it" and may have been "trying to influence
and not inform" the British officials.

Reservations and proposed amendments were discussed at a meeting in the department on 19
September, which Dr Kelly had attended along with Mr A.

Giving evidence by audiolink, Mr A, who is attached to the counter-proliferation and arms control
department at the MoD, said there had been unhappiness at the meeting that the Government had
claimed in a draft of the dossier that there was great concern that Iraq was manufacturing phosgene for
chemical weapons at a compound. The allegation was false and he advised that it should be changed.
But his recommendation was ignored and he said that he was not surprised when Iraqi authorities took
journalists to visit the compound after the dossier's publication.

That day, Mr A sent an e-mail to Dr Kelly saying he agreed with the plant manager, who was
reported as saying it was "a pretty stupid mistake by the British". He added: "They [the Government]
were grasping at straws ... Another example ... that you and I should have been more involved in this
than the spin merchants ... Let's hope it turns into tomorrow's chip wrappers."
CC