In article ,
"Ronnie Clark"
rve.co.uk wrote:

Starting wars? Hmm, in years to come they'll still be telling tales of the
government that took us on an illegal war

You've just had the proof it was not illegal.

based on fabricated evidence

There's a difference between evidence which turns out to be inaccurate
and evidence which has been fabricated. This was the former.

after a million people marched on Westminster to say "We don't want
to go to war."

Is that a new constitutional rule? More than a certain number marching
in London creates an absolute duty on government, regardless of the
merits of the issue? I could point out all the reasons why that's
objectionable but don't feel like wasting your time: if you can't
see them now you never will.

--
http://www.election.demon.co.uk
"I feel Mr (John) Hemming deserves a mention. True, he was a dreadful witness.
His evidence was largely inadmissible hearsay. He possesses an inability to
give a straight answer to a straight question" - para 706