Beyond Parady
Try as I might, I can’t resist highlighting this extraordinary CiF entry by the former director of communications and press secretary at the Foreign Office, John Williams. It’s a bizarre combination of revisionism, an admission of culpability and, well, idiocy.
There’s a bit of controversy over at CiF over the Guardian’s stealthy rewriting of the sub-heading; they changed “I don’t remember anyone questioning the intelligence” to “I don’t recall my colleagues questioning the intelligence”. The second version is the more accurate representation of what he was trying to say but it doesn’t really help his cause.
He wrote:
It’s very frustrating, as a minor participant, to have learned afterwards that that the head of MI6 felt the intelligence was being made to fit around the policy. I took the intelligence seriously. Nobody ever cast doubt on it in my presence at the time. And those last three words are crucial - at the time. Hindsight is a luxury government doesn’t have.
Nobody? At the time? Hindsight?
The Westminster bubble is clearly a much better insulator than we’d previously thought.
The admission which Williams sweetens with a little light revisionism is that the government as a whole wilfully refused to listen to the many doubts which were being expressed at the time. More than that, those of us with semi-functioning memories can recall that Blair dismissed these doubts by implying that if only we knew what he knew, if only he could give us the full picture, we’d see how ridiculous these doubts were. And didn’t we just…
Williams worked for Robin Cook, for crying out loud. You know, the Foreign Secretary who who, on the eve of war, resigned saying that “Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction in the commonly understood sense of the term”. But John doesn’t recall his “colleague” saying that. Maybe Cook never told the Foreign Office’s director of communications why he was resigning as Foreign Secretary. Maybe Williams somehow managed to avoid every single instance of the widespread media coverage of the reasons for his boss’s resignation. Or maybe… No, I’ll stop now before this goes all sweary.
Hindsight? How about using those fleshy things you’ve got on the sides of your head instead?
And what lesson can we learn from this fictional version of events as the government attempts to deal with Iran?
The dossier was a mistake. I say that not with hindsight, but having argued unsuccessfully at the time that Britain should not take on the burden of proving that a country to which we had no access was in possession of illegal weapons. It should have been for Saddam Hussein to prove that he didn’t have them.
Now, it must remain Iran’s duty to show that it is not trying to master the technology necessary to produce a nuclear weapon, not President Bush’s to assert that it is.
I’m thinking of starting a campaign to pressure Mr Williams into acknowledging the existence of the Celestial Teapot. He has, after all, failed to prove that it does not exist.
AndyW said,
November 2, 2007 @ 6:47 pm
Iraq must rate as one of the most shameful episodes in our history.
The article only goes to show what a second rate bunch of low-lifes were involved.
No sackings, no honourable resignations, just revisionist crap.
We pay taxes to employ that **** .
alan_b said,
November 2, 2007 @ 7:19 pm
To be strictly accurate, by the time Robin Cook resigned he had been demoted from Foreign Secretary to Leader of the House of Commons
Garry said,
November 2, 2007 @ 8:05 pm
Andy. I can only agree.
Alan, ah yes. That’s what I get for blogging angry.