London Observer (Sunday): BBC dossier reveals fury at Hutton 'flaws'

[Jack Rabbit]

Form the London Observer (Sunday supplement of the Guardian Unlimited)
Dated Sunday February 1

BBC dossier reveals fury at Hutton "flaws"
· QC outlines Dyke battle plan
· Hutton verdict 'wrong in law'
· Spy chief revealed WMD doubt
By Kamal Ahmed, political editor

The war between the BBC and the Government was re-ignited last night after a series of leaked documents revealed growing insistence within the corporation that there are fundamental flaws in Lord Hutton's report.
A confidential briefing document taking to task key findings by the Ulster judge reveals that executives throughout the BBC believe that the inquiry report was blatantly one-sided and took little account of the corporation's evidence.
As Tony Blair prepares to 'give some ground' on the issue of weapons of mass destruction at an appearance before a parliamentary committee of inquiry on Tuesday, the fresh evidence reveals that far from letting it drop, many senior executives want to continue the battle.
A second leaked document prepared by the BBC for Hutton also reveals crucial details of why executives stood by its controversial Today report, detailing a lunch between the head of MI6, Sir Richard Dearlove, and Kevin Marsh, the editor of the Today programme.
In a witness statement prepared by Marsh and BBC legal representatives, it is claimed that Dearlove suggested that 'hard evidence of WMD in Iraq would never be found'.

Read more.

The Hutton Report hasn't been discredited yet. On the other hand, it's hard to find anyone outside of Tony Blair and his inner circle who believe it.

[Eric J in MN]

1. A fair process would have been for Blair and the BBC to each

The dispute is between Tony Blair and the BBC.

A fair process would have been for Blair and the BBC to each appoint investigators with equal power to serve on an inquiry board.

Not for Blair to make the appointment.

[krkaufman]

2. I don't see the problem

John Ashcroft appointed the investigator looking into the Valerie Plame/Joseph Wilson leak. What's the hassle?

[T_i_B]

3. Are we all mad, or is it Hutton?

Must read article that lays into the Hutton report big time.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/focus/story/0,6903,1136400,00.html

[Jack Rabbit]

4. Thank you

From the article:

It is a sublime irony that the process which vindicated Tony Blair, Alastair Campbell, the intelligence services and Whitehall now threatens to become an even bigger problem for the Government precisely because Lord Hutton handed it such a clear victory over the BBC.
While Campbell gloated and Ministers tried to draw lines under the affair, a rumble of anger spread through the public because the average citizen has grasped several important facts since last summer:

1. Forget weapons of mass destruction - barely a rack of stink bombs has been found in Iraq.
2. Dr David Kelly died because he was treated shabbily after speculating how and why faulty intelligence led us to war.
3. Despite all its errors and incompetence, the BBC has done more than most to ventilate the political use of intelligence prior to the invasion.

That is the real situation that Blair is attempting to use the Hutton Report to paper over. It isn't working.