Crikey, rightly, puts at least two journalists, Greg Sheridan [of The Australian] and Andrew Bolt [of the Herald-Sun] in their place as people who were back when the Iraq War got underway, and since then, so way off-the-mark in their analysis and commentary to make them laughable. In fact, why are they retained by the Murdoch press- and no less importantly, why does anyone read their scribbling let alone take it seriously?
Most commentary on the Chilcot Inquiry Report of and associated with the Iraq War, has been "lifted" from the Executive Summary. The Intercept has actually gone and dug into the Report, with these revelations : "THE CHILCOT REPORT, the U.K.’s official inquiry into its participation in the Iraq War, has finally been released after seven years of investigation. Its executive summary certainly makes former Prime Minister Tony Blair, who led the British push for war, look terrible. According to the report, Blair made statements about Iraq’s nonexistent chemical, biological, and nuclear programs based on “what Mr. Blair believed” rather than the intelligence he had been given. The U.K. went to war despite the fact that “diplomatic options had not been exhausted.” Blair was warned by British intelligence that terrorism would “increase in the event of war, reflecting intensified anti-US/anti-Western sentiment in the Muslim world, including among Muslim communities in the
Comments