So far as I am aware Wilkie is the first intelligence eyewitness from any of the invading powers to offer an explanation of how false intelligence assessments led the three countries into an unnecessary, unlawful and unjust war.

Despite this intelligence, what Wilkie witnessed - to his astonishment - throughout 2002 and early 2003, was the systematic distortion by the pro-war leaders in America, Britain and Australia of the sceptical, ambiguous or nuanced intelligence on Iraq all these governments received.

Wilkie provides a complex and subtle analysis of how this distortion took place. The most common technique was the excision by political leaders of the crucial qualifying comments contained in the intelligence reports they used.

An assessment might mention, for example, the existence of "unconfirmed reports" about an Iraqi chemical weapons plant, or might speculate that a meeting between an Iraqi official and an al-Qaeda leader "could have" taken place. By the removal of the qualifiers, speculative assessments were, time and again, transformed into terrifying solid facts.

Of course, for his whistle-blowing, Wilkie was not forgiven. At first, the Howard Government tried to discredit him by questioning his Iraq expertise. Second, they claimed him to be psychologically unstable. Finally, by leaking to the right-wing journalist Andrew Bolt a top-secret ONA report Wilkie had written on Iraq, the Government tried to suggest that Wilkie's judgement was hopelessly unsound.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/06/27/1088274624417.html?oneclick=true