Posted by John Hilley
on November 2, 2009, 5:44 pm, in reply to "Re: Paxman on Iraq - "we were hoodwinked""
Thanks Eds.
"We can expect much the same from Paxman as from Aaronovitch."
Yes, of course.
It's a bit of a 'Greg Dyke moment', though more potentially damning in its implications given the human cost of the war while elite journos sat by and helped peddle the warmongers' lies. I wonder if Paxman's words will get any mainstream exposure at all? Techncally, he's in breach of BBC guidelines by expressing an open view.
John
--Previous Message--
: John, we'be heard that before...
:
: David Aaronovitch wrote in the Guardian of
: Iraq‘s alleged weapons of mass destruction:
:
: "If nothing is eventually found, I - as
: a supporter of the war - will never believe
: another thing that I am told by our
: government, or that of the US ever again.
: And, more to the point, neither will anyone
: else. Those weapons had better be there
: somewhere." (Aaronovitch, ‘Those
: weapons had better be there...,’ The
: Guardian, April 29, 2003;
: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,,945551,00.html
: )
:
: Alas, four years later:
:
: “When Tony Blair became Leader of the
: Opposition in 1994, he... knew little about
: foreign policy. What he did have was a
: series of instincts about how the Major
: Government and the international community
: had handled affairs in Bosnia, and he wasn't
: impressed. Ever the anti-fatalist, once in
: office he was inclined to see such problems
: as requiring a solution. And passing across
: his desk in autumn 1997 were a series of
: intelligence reports concerning the dictator
: of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, and his weapons of
: mass destruction. ‘We cannot let him get
: away with it,’ he told Paddy Ashdown that
: November.”
: (Aaronovitch, ‘Tony Blair: The war? I
: believed in it, I believed in it then, I
: believe in it now,’ The Times, November 17,
: 2007;
:
: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/the_blair_years/article2886677.ece
: )
:
: Aaronovitch claimed he would never beleve
: Blair again, but here he claimed that
: "passing across his desk in autumn 1997
: were a series of intelligence reports
: concerning the dictator of Iraq, Saddam
: Hussein, and his weapons of mass
: destruction". As was obvious to just
: about everyone else in 2007, that wasn't
: true - there was nothing passing across
: Blair's desk to prompt his propaganda
: campaign, except perhaps orders from Bush.
:
: Carne Ross, a key Foreign Office diplomat
: responsible for monitoring UN arms
: inspections in Iraq, said in 2005 that
: British government claims about Iraq's
: weapons programme had been "totally
: implausible". Ross told the Guardian:
:
: "I'd read the intelligence on WMD for
: four and a half years, and there's no way
: that it could sustain the case that the
: government was presenting. All of my
: colleagues knew that, too." (Richard
: Norton-Taylor, 'WMD claims were
: "totally implausible",' The
: Guardian, June 20, 2005)
:
: John Morrison, a former deputy chief of
: defence intelligence, commented on Blair‘s
: warnings of “a current and serious threat to
: the UK”: "When I heard him using those
: words, I could almost hear the collective
: raspberry going up around Whitehall."
: (Richard Norton-Taylor, 'Official sacked
: over TV remarks on Iraq,' The Guardian, July
: 26, 2004)
:
: But Aaronovitch was happy to believe in
: 2007:
:
: “The nightmare was the confluence of WMD
: with terrorism... and Saddam's continued
: defiance of UN resolutions seemed to confirm
: intelligence reports of continuing WMD
: capacity.” That was Blair's invention -
: nothing to do with reality.
:
: We can expect much the same from Paxman as
: from Aaronovitch.
:
: Eds
:
:
Responses: