|
The source you cited in your opening post was garbage then and it's garbage now.
The Chilcot report cleared the Prime Minister's Office of influencing the Iraq Dossier (the "Dodgy Dossier"), which contained the claim that Iraq possessed the ability to launch WMD within 45 minutes, and instead laid the blame for the weaknesses in its evidence on the Joint Intelligence Committee. It did find that references to this intelligence in government reports were over-certain and did not adequately stress uncertainties and nuance. It wasn't the first and won't be the last time governments act on bad intelligence.
Tony Blair acknowledged that the report made "real and material criticisms of preparation, planning, process and of the relationship with the United States" but cited sections of the report that he said "should lay to rest allegations of bad faith, lies or deceit."
There's a good chance that much of their information came from us. We're the ones who "sexed up" the claims on the nature of the Iraqi threat with Colin Powell's presentations even being televised. We claimed it was to get WMDs and when that didn't work claimed it was to get terrorists and when that didn't work claimed it was to free the Iraqi people (who didn't want us there). We sold our allies on it.
In a statement to the House of Commons the afternoon after the Inquiry was released, Prime Minister David Cameron said that he did not see "a huge amount of point" in "replaying all the arguments of the day" and said that focus should instead be on learning "the lessons of what happened and what needs to be put in place to make sure that mistakes cannot be made in future."
The information you cite in your opening post makes it clear that you're living in the past tw. You want to replay the arguments of the day and put your spin on them in hindsight. The Chilcot Inquiry has been criticized as "an establishment stitch-up" just as the Hutton Inquiry was in it's day. Please try to stop living in the past so you can grow old with dignity.
|