The Report
of the Iraq Inquiry
and ricin
within day of the order to do so. Sought mobile facilities to
produce
biological
agent. […]]”
•
“Executive
Summary, Para 3 – 2nd Bullet: The
judgement ‘has military plans
for the use
of chemical and biological weapons, some of which could be
ready
within 45
minutes of an order to use them’. Is also rather strong since it is
based
on a single
source. ‘Could say intelligence suggests …’”
•
“Part
1, Chapter 2, Para 16: The
statement ‘… Iraq continues to produce
chemical
and biological agents.’ This is too strong. See comment
above.
Suggest
‘may continue to produce’ even ‘probably continues to
produce’.”
•
“Part
1, Chapter 3, Para 1 – 1st Bullet: The
statement ‘which has included
recent
production of chemical and biological agents;’ is too strong from
the CW
perspective.
This is based on a single source.”
•
“Part
1, Chapter 3, Para 5 Recent Intelligence: From
the CW perspective the
language is
too strong since the information is based on single sources.
The
wording
‘intelligence shows that’ is too strong and inappropriate” ‘reports
that’,
‘indicates
that’, ‘suggests that’ would be more appropriate.”
•
“Part
1, Chapter 3, Para 8 – Line 1: The
statement ‘Intelligence confirms that
Iraq has
continued to produce chemical agent.’ This is far too strong
considering
the
available evidence. The word confirms is totally inappropriate.
“Intelligence
suggests
that …’ would be better”.
•
“Part
1, Chapter 3, Para 12: The
statement ‘We know from intelligence that Iraq
has
continued to produce BW agents’. This is quite strong considering
what the
int
actually says …”
•
“Part
1, Chapter 3, Para 16: The
statement ‘Iraq has continued to produce
CBW agent’.
Some elements of the summary repeat the same overly
strong
statements
as in the rest of this chapter.”
460.
The response
to the DIS concerns is addressed later in this
Section.
461.
Mr Blair
and officials within No.10 offered a number of
comments
on the draft.
462.
Mr Pruce
commented that the new draft:
•
“re-ordered
the text, with the new intell nearer the front (might be able to
bring it
further
forward)”;
•
“added a
short chapter on JIC and intelligence”, which was “Good but could
give
more
details”;
•
“kept in
the longer nuclear timelines … We need to think carefully about
how
these will
appear to compare with the IISS figure of a weapon within a
few
months”;
and
200