The sham of "independent" inquiries

Former Member

Fine, sequester them or put them into a witness protection scheme until their claims could be verified.

What this situation has demonstrated clearly is that "sources" are those who happen to tell our leaders whatever they want to hear in line with what they already intend to do regardless of the legality of the matter.

In this case, sources refer to Chalabi and his crowd who for years were claiming this or that and putting forward the odd exile to support their claims all out of their own partisan interests and desire to ascend to power in Iraq. Hardly trustworthy "sources" in the least.

Former Member

I'm reading the report and I am kind of altering my perception by doing so. Gilligan should have immediately accepted/admitted that his source/sources may have been exaggerated.

Yes there's an issue here RE weapons of mass sestruction and the capability to fire them within 45 minutes but no journalist should be allowed to lie to try and prove something.

That said I still think Hutton was harsh on the BBC and too lenient toward the MOD/Government. Alistair Campbell is a persistent complainer.

Former Member

have a laugh for a minute

http://www.breedar.co.uk/news.bbc.co.uk/1/uk_politics/3441181.html

Former Member

LOL.

Former Member

Originally posted by Clandestine
Fine, sequester them or put them into a witness protection scheme until their claims could be verified.

Surely you aren't being serious? Either that or you misunderstand the nature of intelligence...

We're not talking about one shot deals here, where people only provide a single piece of information - in perso and directly to the nation of their choice.

We're talking spying, people continually giving information over a period of years - possibly because of their job.

One slip by our agencies and they are D.E.A.D.

How on earth do you think that you would be able to a) get them out of their own country before you can even think of doing b) witness protection.

BTW for information, all agents coming in are sequestered away for a "de-briefing...

Former Member

Some intelligence comes from spying, but the bulk of the supposed intelligence which the administrations claimed to prove "imminent" threat came from people already residing abroad (aka "exiles") or persons taken into custody (all f whome also had their own agendas for wanting to connive us into toppling the regime so they could come back (with our help) and take over (i.e. Chalabi and co.) even though they have zero legitimacy in the country itself.

In the end MoK, its a matter of putting our foot down as nations and declaring that no longer can we simply trust that there IS colid intelligence when there is no process by which anyone outside of the inner circles can verify it in any way.

Haven't you heard enough lies already to conclude that more public scrutiny must be instituted to ensure that claims for necessary militancy are vetted fully before we send our soldiers off to fight what is later revealed to be nothing more than personal vendettas or war for corporate control and not in any way in response to actual legitimate threat to our own countries?

I for one am sick to death of the fear mongering, the duplicity and the utter disregard for international law which has been the stock in trade of far too many successive governments (each case unfailingly cloaked with "national security" claims).