You are viewing j_rentoul

John Rentoul

John Rentoul is chief political commentator for The Independent on Sunday, and visiting fellow at Queen Mary, University of London, where he teaches contemporary history. Previously he was chief leader writer for The Independent. He has written a biography of Tony Blair, whom he admired more at the end of his time in office than he did at the beginning.

"The Independent's must-read man" - Daniel Finkelstein

You can contact John in the comments area or email him at j.rentoul@independent.co.uk

Previous Entry | Next Entry


Meanwhile, in a parallel universe

Posted by John Rentoul
  • Tuesday, 1 December 2009 at 07:30 pm


In this other reality, the Chilcot inquiry has been reported as an exercise in trying to understand how a Government, convinced that Saddam Hussein was a threat, decided to support an American military action that was going ahead whether it supported it or not.

Stan Rosenthal gives his edited summary of the first two days of the Iraq Inquiry. As with the mainstream media coverage, everything here was already in the public domain, but I would argue that this selection gives a more truthful account both of the proceedings of the inquiry and of the history that it is investigating.

Once again, I must pay homage to Iraq Inquiry Digest, a website run by antis who are genuinely open to debate and happy to host proponents of the opposite case.

Update: I must apologise to Julie Puschi (see comments below) for failing to realise that Stan Rosenthal was reposting her original summary of the Chilcot proceedings. All credit to her, and see her website for more.

Comments

The Parallel Iraq Inquiry Digest
blairsupporter wrote:
Tuesday, 1 December 2009 at 11:27 pm (UTC)
I agree that it's good to see the Iraq Inquiry Digest publishing this report (via Stan Rosenthal) of Julie's which I have also used at my blog. Very balanced of them. Refreshing. They'd probably argue with you that they are "antis", but their main man, Chris Ames is clearly anti and has published elsewhere - in the Guardian - VERY anti the Iraq war and questioning of its legality.

http://www.iraqinquirydigest.org/?page_id=2

Excerpt: "It seeks to provide a balance of views and opinion. Its objective is to be constructive and to provide reasoned and well argued comment."

But this page names their contributors and supporters. Worth a glance:

http://www.iraqinquirydigest.org/?page_id=261

Still, as you say John, at least they haven't closed the door to pro-contributors, and as I understand it they ASKED Stan Rosenthal to contribute as a regular.

They seemed to take some umbrage at Manning's report for some reason. Can't imagine why.

http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.com/2009/12/01/blair-trial-sorry-iraq-inquiry-nothing-to-see-here-move-along/
Thanks
juliepuschi wrote:
Wednesday, 2 December 2009 at 12:04 am (UTC)
Thanks a lot for using my summaries, John.

Balancing the selective quotes from the anti-war/anti-Blair people is crucial to get the truth across. Especially, since the media tends to focus only on the negative things.
------------

Btw, here are the links to the original summaries:

http://puschiii.wordpress.com/2009/11/29/iraq-inquiry-1st-day-of-public-hearingmorning-session/

And a summary of Manning's evidence (best so far for TB, imho)

http://puschiii.wordpress.com/2009/11/29/iraq-inquiry-2nd-day-of-public-hearing-with/
Advertisement

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Report Comment

To report an offensive comment for review, please send a Personal Message and provide a link to the comment. The moderators will review it and take action if necessary.
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by chasethestars