Sexing-up” victim

Mr Blair’s “admission”: that even he was fooled by the ‘sex­ing-up’ of the UK government’s case for war, bad­ly stains the white­wash[⇒ relat­ed sto­ry] that Lord Hut­ton poured over the UK government’s pre­sen­ta­tion of the case for war. The Prime Min­is­ter, too, assumed that the “45-minute” claim about Iraqi WMD readi­ness referred to strate­gic weapons (in fact, the intel­li­gence referred only to the­atre weapons and was wrong, even so). Hut­ton, incred­i­bly, refused to find that the delib­er­ate ambi­gu­i­ty of the UK intel­li­gence report on this issue was an instance of ‘sex­ing-up’ the case for war. Evi­dent­ly, it was sexy enough to fool the Prime Min­is­ter who now says, how­ev­er, that it was not impor­tant. Blair’s claim of igno­rance seems designed to sup­port his asser­tion that the gov­ern­ment did not—or, at least, he did not—approve the use of mate­r­i­al known to be untrue in sup­port­ing the case for war. But it leaves open the very issue to which Hut­ton turned a blind eye: whether the use of mate­r­i­al not known to be true (sin­gle, ques­tion­able source) in a man­ner cal­cu­lat­ed to mis­lead and actu­al­ly mis­lead­ing, amounts to “sex­ing-up”, “over-egging” or, in plain­er words, attempt­ing to fool most of the peo­ple some of the time.

No Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email is never shared.Required fields are marked *