Jump to content

Iom Govt Prepares For Pre-emptive Strike?


traveller

Recommended Posts

Letter: Intelligence chiefs still using weasel words over Iraq dossier Rod Barton

The Independent - United Kingdom; Apr 13, 2005

 

Sir: As a former Australian intelligence liaison officer, I attended many meetings of

the Joint Intelligence Committee in the 1980s. It was an organisation that I admired.

I recall debates it had to select just the right words that would accurately reflect

the intelligence available to it. Australia does not have an equivalent organisation

and I used to think that we were the poorer. Not any more.

 

Last week the annual report of the Intelligence and Security Committee was presented

to the British Parliament. In it, the chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee

reviews its performance in relation to Iraq, including the dossier it produced in

September 2002. In admitting its mistakes the JIC is still weasel-wording its

self-criticism to imply that it missed the mark by only a little.

 

The dossier stated: 'Iraq co uld produce significant quantities of mustard within

weeks, significant quantities of Sarin and VX within months, and, in the case of VX

may already have done so.' In its review the JIC now states: 'Although a capability

to produce some agents probably existed, this judgment has not been substantiated.'

What does the JIC mean by 'not substantiated'? The Iraq Survey Group, which spent 18

months hunting for Iraq's missing weapons, reported last year that in fact Iraq had

no capability to produce most of these agents after 1991.

 

On missiles, the JIC wrote in its dossier: 'Iraq retains up to 20 al- Hussein

ballistic missiles' but now says 'This has not been substantiated.' In fact, the ISG

accounted for just about all the missiles. What the JIC is now saying is as absurd as saying that it cannot substantiate the Isle of Man's Scud missile programme.

It is word-smithing like this that resulted in the disastrous dossier in the first

place. Intell igence assessment agencies are in an extremely powerful position, with

access to sensitive material which the average citizen will never see. They therefore

have an obligation to use words responsibly and not put their own spin on

assessments, including assessments of their own performance.

ROD BARTON

CONDER RIDGE, AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY, AUSTRALIA

THE WRITER WAS THE SENIOR ADVISOR TO THE IRAQ SURVEY GROUP

 

So there we have it - the IOM does have a scud-missile programme - its just that the JIC is saying it cannot substantiate it. What is the range Manchester or London? Who presses the firing button? Martin Blackburn at Civil Defence ought to be prepared for full scale retaliation, is he??

How much has the programme cost? How much was the overspend? Is that why the MEA needs the extra capacity for the tracking and launching systems? there are just too many questions that need answering - what does Govt's PR say about it all? ?????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...