(standard disclaimer) Ok so not much of a diary here, but this is big news.
I am an English man in this fine country we call America. I don't post many diaries, but this just took my breath away. There have been several stories out of the UK in recent weeks, the British government have been forced to release information regarding the decisions to go to war in Iraq.
The first was the release of the intelligence dossier that was used to build the case for war with Iraq. The original dossier was release and the controversial claim that Iraq could launch WMD in 45 minutes was not in the original dossier, drafted by intelligence agencies. It was in the released version, after being edited by politicians.
Now the British government have been ordered to release further information regarding the decisions to go to war. Two sets of minutes from cabinet level meetings.
The government has been ordered today to release the minutes of cabinet meetings in which military action against Iraq was discussed.
Who ordered this? The Orwellian sounding "office of the information commissioner", Richard Thomas.
The office of the information commissioner, Richard Thomas, announced today that the confidential minutes would have to be made public under the Freedom of Information Act.
Thomas said that the papers should be released because of the "gravity and controversial nature" of the discussions.
"He believes that disclosure of this information would allow the public to more fully understand this particular decision of the cabinet," the commissioner's office said in a statement.
The order comes a week after the release of an early draft of the controversial intelligence dossier that later included a claim that Iraq could launch weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes, also under the Freedom of Information Act.
The first draft did not contain that claim.
This is on the back of the recent release of the recent intelligence dossier. Remember the government in the UK made the claim that Iraq could launch WMD in 45 minutes. The government were accused of "sexing up" the evidence. David Kelly, the UK's premier expert on Iraq weapons systems ended up committing suicide, after he said this was not true. When the report was released, under the freedom of information act, the initial report did not include the 45 minute claim, which seems to suggest the dossier was "sexed up".
It looks like we may be getting to the bottom of this, by the way of my home country.
Huge news. There will be a challenge from the government, but it will fail. The UK government is fighting off scandals from every corner, they have little chance of stopping this information being turned over to the public, but they will try.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/...
UPDATE:
This was after the firt challenge from the government.
The demand came from Information Commissioner Richard Thomas after a Freedom of Information request was rejected by the Cabinet Office.
But as i said they can, and will, appeal.
The order refers to meetings on 7 and 17 March, 2003. The Cabinet Office can appeal against the decision.
The "no shit" quote...
The person making the request said that not releasing the information created "a public impression that something not entirely truthful has been uttered".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/...
As some posters have said, it is unlikely this will get much coverage this side of the Atlantic, but this could have serious ramifications in the election. When the minutes are released, its hard to see how the MSM could ignore it.
Update 2:
Here is the link to the dossier that was released recently.
http://www.fco.gov.uk/...
Update 3:
As several posters have mentioned this information will not be released over night. The government (Blair’s Labor party) are still in power and will appeal. I find it doubtful that they will succeed. The release of the first draft of the dossier was appealed, and was released, and caused a firestorm because of the omission of the 45 minute claim. The Labor party is now hugely unpopular, and is likely to lose heavily in the upcoming local elections, possibly losing the balance of power. Look for this to be released in the summer.
It will also not be great for Blair’s bid to become European President.
Update 4:
Some more information of David Kelly, while I take no stand on his death (it is my belief we do not have enough information) the events surrounding his death are suspect, to say the least.
Here are the details taken from Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/...
Although suicide was officially accepted as the cause of death, some medical experts have raised doubts, suggesting that the evidence does not back this up. The most detailed objection was provided in a letter from three medical doctors published in The Guardian,[16] reinforced by support from two other senior physicians in a later letter to the Guardian.[17] These doctors argued that the autopsy finding of a transected ulnar artery could not have caused a degree of blood loss that would kill someone, particularly when outside in the cold (where vasoconstriction would slow blood loss). Further, this conflicted with the minimal amount of blood found at the scene. They also contended that the amount of co-proxamol found was only about a third of what would normally be fatal. Dr. Rouse, a British epidemiologist wrote to the BMJ pointing out that the act of committing suicide by severing wrist arteries is an extremely rare occurrence in a 59-year-old man with no previous psychiatric history.[18] Nobody else died from that cause during the year.
Dave Bartlett and Vanessa Hunt, the two paramedics who were called to the scene of Kelly's death, have since gone public with their view that there was not enough blood at the location to justify the belief that he died from blood loss. Bartlett and Hunt told the Guardian that they saw a small amount of blood on plants near Kelly's body and a patch of blood the size of a coin on his trousers. They said they would expect to find several pints of blood at the scene of a suicide involving an arterial cut.[19][20]
However, two of Britain's top forensic pathologists, Chris Milroy and Guy Rutty, dismissed the paramedics' claims, saying it is hard to judge blood loss from the scene of a death, as some blood may have seeped into the ground. Milroy also told the Guardian that Kelly's heart condition may have made it hard for him to sustain any significant degree of blood loss.[21]
The Hutton Inquiry took priority over an inquest, which would normally be required into a suspicious death.[22] The Oxfordshire coroner, Nicholas Gardiner, considered the issue again in March 2004. After reviewing evidence that had not been presented to the Hutton Inquiry, Gardiner decided that there was no need for further investigation. This conclusion did not satisfy those who had raised doubts, but there has been no alternative official explanation for Kelly's death.
Norman Baker MP for Lewes announced on May 19, 2006 that he had been investigating "unanswered questions" from the official inquiry into Kelly's death.[23] Later he announced that he had uncovered evidence to show that Kelly did not die from natural causes.[24] In July 2006, Baker claimed that his hard drive had been wiped remotely.[25] Baker's book The Strange Death of David Kelly was serialised in the Daily Mail before publication in November 2007. Family members of David Kelly have expressed their displeasure at forthcoming publication. The husband of Kelly's sister Sarah said "It is just raking over old bones ... I can't speak for the whole family, but I've read it all [Baker's theories], every word, and I don't believe it." [1]
The BBC showed a programme on Kelly on February 25, 2007 on The Conspiracy Files series;[26] the network commissioned an opinion poll to establish the views of the public on his death. 22.7% of those surveyed thought Kelly had not killed himself, 38.8% of people believe he had, and 38.5% did not know.[27]
On October 15, 2007, it was discovered, through a Freedom of Information request, that the knife that Kelly allegedly committed suicide with had no fingerprints on it. [28]