I think it's great that the BBC reports on the shortcomings of the BBC - and I expect some of you out there can't see there's a conflict of interests there. The media close ranks and call Hutton a 'Whitewash', and refuse to see the conflict of interests. As my boss used to say 'turkeys don’t vote for Christmas'.
Face it, if Hutton had found against the government he'd still be a 'High grade well thought-of individual', but because the answer wasn't what the cynics and sceptics wanted/hoped for he's just another crony
Perhaps those of us that had access to the info that was kicking around before GW2 should be asked to comment on the Int we were working off (not the specifics) rather that listening to the journos gob off about something they know ******-all about. How can some hack who has never seen the inside of an Int cell consider himself/herself better suited, armed with hindsight, to judge the Int world? Perhaps IntOs should be asked to investigate journalism standards in the UK press?
I'd be happy to write a few words about defeatism and political agendas in the BBC 1982-2004. The bastar*s were noticeably upset that we didn't take more casualties than we did and were forever looking for the negative angle to any story - even to the point of plain making things up - Gilligan was just the most blatant example, and when challenged the BBC just showed it's arrogance in refusing to believe its reporters could possibly be wrong
Tony, for all his failings, had to go in the Int available like the rest of us.
And for anyone hoping to use Hutton to beat the government, if you're unhappy with the results of GW2 has only to start a petition to put Saddam back in power
-Nick