Butler-Report: doch noch Folgen f�r Blair?

--- Der Guardian interpretiert den Butler-Report anders als die britische Regierung. Er verweist vor allem darauf, dass die Vorw�rfe des BBC-Reporters Andrew Gilligan hinsichtlich des "aufgesexten" britischen Irak-Dossiers durch den Bericht letztlich unterf�tter w�rden und der Fall, der auch dem BBC-Chef den Kopf kostete, neu aufgerollt werden m�sse: It is time to rewrite history. Six months ago, the BBC lost the chairman of its governors, its director general, and the reporter Andrew Gilligan, after Lord Hutton's sweeping condemnation of Gilligan's infamous report of May 29 2002, the corporation's refusal to admit it was wrong and the governors' handling of complaints from Alastair Campbell. On Wednesday, Lord Butler, another establishment stalwart, largely substantiated Gilligan's report and certainly legitimised the BBC's defence of it. ... Butler, unlike Hutton, has seen the intelligence and studied the way it was used. Gilligan, it turns out, was right. Caveats and health warnings were lost in translation between the joint intelligence committee assessment of the 45-minute claim (even then mysteriously shorn of its battlefield context), and the dossier. One cautious "indication" became a barely qualified assertion used in the prime minister's foreword, the executive summary and twice more in the dossier. It now emerges that MI6 has lost confidence in the validity of the claim. ... There were failings at the BBC for which three individuals paid a heavy price. The clock cannot be turned back for Gavyn Davies, Greg Dyke and Andrew Gilligan. But now that Butler has confirmed the serious shortcomings in the use of intelligence, which Gilligan reported, the record ought to be set straight - even if Butler holds no one person responsible for those failings. Weitere kritische Stimmen u.a. beim Independent und bei Arab News.

Update: Passendes Titelthema des Economist: Spymasters or spinmeisters?: British and American inquiries into intelligence failures over Saddam Hussein�s supposed illegal weapons have both found that their countries� spy chiefs hyped up questionable evidence, which happened to help their political masters make the case for war