Not only does Hutton thus effectively end freedom of the press in Britain, his report also forms part of the ongoing plan of the Powers That Be to weaken and destroy the BBC, so that its functions can be taken up by thugs more in tune with the establishment, like, say, Rupert Murdoch. Hutton's report is a direct attack on the very structure of democracy in Britain, and is practically a fascist document.

Cisco chief John Chambers explained in Davos that productivity improvements could continue for 10 years ? one reason why technology stocks are back in favour.

On Tuesday Mr. Bush declared that the war was justified ? under U.N. Resolution 1441, no less ? because Saddam "did not let us in.")

In any case, the point is that a grave mistake was made, and America's credibility has been badly damaged ? and nobody is being held accountable. But that's standard operating procedure. As far as I can tell, nobody in the Bush administration has ever paid a price for being wrong. Instead, people are severely punished for telling inconvenient truths. And administration officials have consistently sought to freeze out, undermine or intimidate anyone who might try to check up on their performance.
Finally, an important story that has largely evaded public attention: the effort to prevent oversight of Iraq spending. Government agencies normally have independent, strictly nonpartisan inspectors general, with broad powers to investigate questionable spending. But the new inspector general's office in Iraq operates under unique rules that greatly limit both its powers and its independence.
And the independence of the Pentagon's own inspector general's office is also in question. Last September, in a move that should have caused shock waves, the administration appointed L. Jean Lewis as the office's chief of staff. Ms. Lewis played a central role in the Whitewater witch hunt (seven years, $70 million, no evidence of Clinton wrongdoing); nobody could call her nonpartisan.
Still, the big story isn't about Mr. Bush; it's about what's happening to America. Other presidents would have liked to bully the C.I.A., stonewall investigations and give huge contracts to their friends without oversight. They knew, however, that they couldn't. What has gone wrong with our country that allows this president to get away with such things?

A Gallup survey - commissioned by the World Economic Forum - shows that in most countries if you are prosperous you are much less concerned about security than if your country is depressed. Australia is the exception, ranking high in both prosperity and in concern for security.

It was a measure of Mr. Bush's problem, and Mr. Tenet's, that Senator Pat Roberts, the Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said this week that his committee's draft report of what went wrong, to be issued soon, would be very specific, and very critical.
"We'll have to get Cheney the new memo," one White House official said after Mr. Cheney's comments. "As soon as we write it."

mred - on the beeb, gwb called Kay "Mr Kay" - i thought he was a doctor? i remember the nyt switching to "Dr"

mred - and Blair has started with the ricin thing

mred - a couple of curious things abuot the hutton report (apart from all the obvious ones, as usual)... firstly, it has been wiped off the front pages (and deeper) already (outside the uk) - mostly in favour of the german cannibal - ok, fine. secondly, we must remember that the hutton report was *primarily* about gilligans 6.07am claim that the govt knew that the 45 min claim was wrong *before* it went into the dodgy dossier (it was added immediately prior to the final draft). this fact is getting lost amongst the beeb and kelly noise. but heres the rub - there is a direct parallel in the US - the shitehouse categorically *knew* that the niger claims were wrong *before* those claims were written into SOTU03.

the Mutton report is widely regarded as a whitewash - so much so that some spundits are suggesting that Mutton was actually sending the signal 'this is so obviously wrong that u can see it was political. given that the outcome was inevitable, i wanted to make that completely clear. any apparent balance would have actually been more misleading'.
imagine if a similar inquiry was held in the US about the niger claim - which should of course include the dastardly plame affair - altho given the clintonesque ability to slice and dice terms of reference, that shouldnt be a given. of course, if gilligans calim that 'they knew' was found to be accurate - then the findings necessarily flip 180 degrees - with the beeb exonerated, and the blurgh govt getting beeb'd - everything hinged on the accuracy of that one statement. in the gwb badministration sotu analogy, there could only be one legitimate finding. *they knew*.