Government lying over Iraq, and they are trusted on MMR!
Mixing it up – those top Hutton lies
Private eye Nov 2003
AS Lord Mutton wades through 23 days worth of transcripts and 9,000 pieces of published evidence in
order to write his report on the circumstances surrounding the death of Dr David Kelly, the Eye
offers readers a bite-sized reminder of the biggest lies that have been exposed by the inquiry over
the last two months.
1. "The allegation that the 45-minute claim provoked disquiet among the intelligence community,
which disagreed with its inclusion in the dossier... is also completely and totally untrue." —
Tony Blair, House of Commons, 4 June.
On 19 September 2002 (just one day before the finalisation of the dossier's contents), the branch
head of the science and technological directorate at the Defence Intelligence Staff, wrote to the
deputy chief director detailing "reservations on several aspects of the dossier", on the part of his
colleagues including "a number of questions in our minds relating to the intelligence on the
military plans for the use of chemical and biological weapons, particularly about the times
mentioned and the failure to differentiate between the two types of weapons."
In another memo the following day, another member of the DIS advised: "It is not clear what is meant
by 'weapons are deployable within 45 minutes'. The judgement is too strong considering the
intelligence on which it is based."
2 "There was no attempt, at any time, by any official, or Minister, or member of the No 10 Downing
Street staff, to override the intelligence judgements of the Joint Intelligence Committee." — Tony
Blair, House of Commons, 4 June.
In an email dated 19 September 2002, after the deadline that had been given to JIC members to submit
changes to the dossier, No 10 chief of staff Jonathan Powell sent the following email to John
Scarlett: "I think the statement on page 19 that 'Saddam is able to use chemical and biological
weapons if he believes his regime is under threat' is a bit of a problem. It backs up the...
argument that there is no CBW threat and we will only create one if we attack him. I think you
should redraft the para."
Although the sentence had already been passed by JIC members in three separate drafts with no
objections, Scarlett told Hutton that as a result of Powell's email he "looked at it again" and "we
concluded that that was not right, the way this was phrased, and therefore we took that out."
3" I did not authorise the leaking of the name of David Kelly. Emphatically not. That is completely
untrue." — Tony Blair, press conference, 22 July.
Questioned by Lord Hutton on 28 August about the decision to confirm David Kelly's name to any
journalists who guessed it, Blair admitted that "responsibility is mine in the end. I take the
decisions." He also said that at the meetings where the decision was taken, "there was some surprise
we expressed to each other... that it had not already leaked, and I think there was no doubt in
anyone's mind that if on reinterview it was clear that he was in all probability the source then we
were going to have to disclose that."
4 "The matter was handled in accordance with MoD procedures and had been overseen by those at the
top of the MoD in view of the fact that it had been the lead department." — Briefing by prime
minister's official spokesman, 22 July.
Questioned by Hutton, Blair admitted that no one from the MoD was present at the meeting where the
decision was made to confirm Dr Kelly's name. He also confirmed that, as the MoD's director of
personnel had said on the first day of the inquiry, no relevant MoD procedures existed. The prime
minister did however continue to maintain he had "played it by the book".
5 "We made great efforts to ensure Dr Kelly's anonymity." — Geoff Hoon, BBC interview, 19 July.
Questioned by Hutton, the defence secretary admitted that on 8 July, just two days after he had
learned of Dr Kelly's identity, he had officially approved the following course of action: "If a
journalist approached the press office with the right name, then that name would be confirmed by
press officers." He also said that Sir Kevin Tebbit checked the plan with him twice during the
following day, and he confirmed his approval.
2. "I do believe that anyone with an interest in good, decent journalism... should understand that
when allegations are made, when lies are broadcast, when there is not a shred of evidence to
substantiate the allegation they should apologise and then we can move on." — Alastair Campbell,
Channel 4 News, 27 June.
Asked why he did not complain about a front page story in the Sunday Times on 1 June which
specifically accused him of making "our intelligence services become the puppets of a lying
government", Campbell replied: "It happens to be untrue but there is not much I can do about that."
When Geoff Hoon was asked why his department had not corrected the many newspapers which had
interpreted the "45-minute" claim in the dossier to refer to anything other than battlefield
munitions, Geoff Hoon told the inquiry: "I have spent many years trying to persuade newspapers and
journalists to correct their stories. It is an extraord