Blair appointed Lord Hutton. Hutton cleared him and blamed the BBC.

[Eric J in MN]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55902-2004Jan28.html?nav=hptop_ts

Did Tony Blair exaggerate when he said that Iraq could launch wmd in 45 minutes?

Or did the BBC lie in reporting that Blair exaggerated.

To find the answer, Tony Blair appointed Lord Hutton. Hutton concluded that Blair was fine while the BBC was terrible. Two of the top people at the BBC have since resigned in disgrace.

Why couldn't the BBC appoint the investigator?

Or why couldn't Blair and the BBC each appoint an investigator to write a joint-report?

I see no vindication for Tony Blair that the man he hired took his side.

The big smile on Blair's face on that webpage I linked above, sickens me.

[salinen]

1. The WH is using this

same abominable rational for pardoning *.

[Eric J in MN]

2. The White House says that because a man Tony Blair appointed

The White House says that because a man Tony Blair appointed took his side, Blair and Bush must be telling the truth?