From The Guardian, 7/8/03:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story...993740,00.html

Blair told: it's time to answer vital questions

Michael White and Matt Wells
Tuesday July 8, 2003
The Guardian

The government was last night confronted with fresh challenges to its
case for waging war in Iraq when a Labour dominated Commons committee
posed a series of unexpectedly sceptical questions about Whitehall's
prewar intelligence assessment.

Far from giving Tony Blair's defence of his government's conduct an
easy run, the Commons foreign affairs select committee listed four
unanswered questions over claims made in the September dossier about
Saddam Hussein's chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programmes
and his missing missiles.

As expected, the committee formally acquitted Mr Blair's
communications director, Alastair Campbell, of "improper influence" or
"sexing up" the dossier by knowingly inserting false claims that
Saddam's weapons could be deployed within 45 minutes of an order, and
doing so against the advice of intelligence officials.

But they still want ministers to say if they continue to believe that
claim is accurate.

"We conclude that the 45 minutes claim did not warrant the prominence
given to it in the dossier, because it was based on intelligence from
a single, uncorroborated source. We recommend that the government
explain why the claim was given such prominence," the report states.

It is now up to the much more secretive intelligence and security
committee to question M16 in private.

It will report in the autumn.

By then ministers will have had time to reply to yesterday's
challenges - probably in a matter of weeks, senior officials said.

The four questions the government must answer are:

· Is the September dossier's verdict on Iraq's chemical and biological
weapons threat still valid?

· What is the current assessment of the dossier's warnings on Samoud 2
missiles and its claim that Iraq had 20 unaccounted for Hussein
missiles?

· When was Jack Straw, foreign secretary, told that documents claiming
Iraq had sought uranium from Niger were forged?

· Is the "45 minute" claim accurate in the light of the subsequent war
when weapons of mass destruction (WMD) were not used?

__________________________________________________ _________

Better check with Georgie before you answer, Tony. We'll all be
waiting. Bush and Blair are now joined at the hip.

Harry

>
>
>From The Guardian, 7/8/03:
>http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story...993740,00.html
>
>Blair told: it's time to answer vital questions
>
>Michael White and Matt Wells
>Tuesday July 8, 2003
>The Guardian
>
>The government was last night confronted with fresh challenges to its
>case for waging war in Iraq when a Labour dominated Commons committee
>posed a series of unexpectedly sceptical questions about Whitehall's
>prewar intelligence assessment.
>
>Far from giving Tony Blair's defence of his government's conduct an
>easy run, the Commons foreign affairs select committee listed four
>unanswered questions over claims made in the September dossier about
>Saddam Hussein's chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programmes
>and his missing missiles.
>
>As expected, the committee formally acquitted Mr Blair's
>communications director, Alastair Campbell, of "improper influence" or
>"sexing up" the dossier by knowingly inserting false claims that
>Saddam's weapons could be deployed within 45 minutes of an order, and
>doing so against the advice of intelligence officials.
>
>But they still want ministers to say if they continue to believe that
>claim is accurate.
>
>"We conclude that the 45 minutes claim did not warrant the prominence
>given to it in the dossier, because it was based on intelligence from
>a single, uncorroborated source. We recommend that the government
>explain why the claim was given such prominence," the report states.
>
>It is now up to the much more secretive intelligence and security
>committee to question M16 in private.
>
>It will report in the autumn.
>
>By then ministers will have had time to reply to yesterday's
>challenges - probably in a matter of weeks, senior officials said.
>
>The four questions the government must answer are:
>
>· Is the September dossier's verdict on Iraq's chemical and biological
>weapons threat still valid?
>
>· What is the current assessment of the dossier's warnings on Samoud 2
>missiles and its claim that Iraq had 20 unaccounted for Hussein
>missiles?
>
>· When was Jack Straw, foreign secretary, told that documents claiming
>Iraq had sought uranium from Niger were forged?
>
>· Is the "45 minute" claim accurate in the light of the subsequent war
>when weapons of mass destruction (WMD) were not used?
>
>_________________________________________________ __________
>
>Better check with Georgie before you answer, Tony. We'll all be
>waiting. Bush and Blair are now joined at the hip.
>
>Harry
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
In my opinion, Bush and Blair have not been truthful.
It's difficult to know what's going on between these two.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~