Paper Trail
Tuesday, September 24th, 2002When you put words that are spoken down on paper, does that make them more truthful? Or more important? Iraq Dossier points [news.bbc.co.uk]
- Iraq has “military plans” for the use of chemical and biological weapons, even against its own population
- Saddam is one or two years off building a nuclear weapon if he manages to obtain weapons-grade material from abroad
- Iraq has “tried covertly to acquire technology and materials which could be used in the production of nuclear weapons”
These things have all been said before. They’ve been neatly packaged up into a government dossier [news.bbc.co.uk] but how does this improve the credibility? No new facts are presented, the old arguments just reworded.
So, my question is, what was the point?
Iraq has dismissed the claims, and promises unlimited access to inspectors [news.bbc.co.uk] but I wonder if the idea of claims that Iraq is preparing to hide equipment are being used to prepare the way for suggestions that, even after inspectors go in, and they don’t find anything, it proves nothing as the weapons could be being hidden
Then they go to war anyway.
We shall see.
Following on from BT going overboard with broadband adverts, I’m not all that surprised to hear folk complaining [news.bbc.co.uk].
