Forced to lie for the MoD: Tormented spin doctor blows whistle on the deceptions fed to loved ones of fallen heroes



A civil servant has broken ranks to reveal how he was forced to lie about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

John Salisbury-Baker, 62, was working in the Ministry of Defence when he says he was ordered to deliberately mislead bereaved families and the public.

He claims he was instructed to issue official statements through the media which were 'heavily spun' and clearly at odds with the reality.

Traumatised: MoD Press Officer John Salisbury-Baker was forced to 'defend the morally indefensible' says his partner, Christine Brooke (right)

Mr Salisbury-Baker was caught up with the huge political storm that has raged for years over the inadequacy of equipment and the safety of the controversial Snatch Land Rover which has been blamed for a series of soldiers' deaths.

Only when the contradictory evidence was overwhelming did the official line from the MoD change, he claims.



Under the Official Secrets Act he is banned from speaking out for fear of prosecution and a possible jail sentence.



But yesterday his partner spoke of his mental anguish and accused the Government of treating the British public like 'fools'.

'Morally indefensible': The spin doctor was forced to tell the media that Snatch Land Rovers, which have been blamed for dozens of soldiers deaths, were safe

'He was expected to lie for the MoD,' said Christine Brooke, 65. 'It was part of his job and a burden he simply couldn't bear. John tried to speak up but was swimming against the tide.'

In his role as a press officer for the MoD he often came into contact with the families of those soldiers killed in action.

It was his duty to act as a 'media shield' - to provide the space for the family to grieve in peace - and to help with the arrangements for repatriation and their funerals.

But in doing so he struggled to cope with the moral dilemma, having previously lied at the behest of the MoD.



Guilt: Mr Salisbury-Baker near his home in York

'He was plagued by the thought that some of them might have previously believed their loved ones were safe, because of what he himself had told the media,' said Mrs Brooke.



'He felt responsible and guilty. He felt he was having to defend the morally indefensible.



'The Snatch vehicles clearly did not give adequate protection from roadside bombs and yet here he was having to say they did.'

She added: 'John cannot find it in his heart to forgive himself, let alone expect others to forgive him and this has torn him apart.'

Mr Salisbury-Baker, whose stepson served in the Navy during the Falklands War, has since been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder which he claims was brought on by the lies he was forced to peddle.



He joined the MoD in 1996 as an information officer. By the time Britain invaded Iraq in 2003 he had been promoted to defence press officer, covering the Armed Services.

'Everything changed with Afghanistan and Iraq,' said Mrs Brooke. 'Put bluntly, he was expected to lie until the evidence was incontrovertible. These lies were centred around members of the Armed Forces being satisfactorily equipped to do their duty in Iraq and latterly Afghanistan.

'Sadly, most of the time they were ill-equipped to do their duty. This meant that when John attended military funerals and spoke with the families, he felt that he was being frugal with the truth.

'He wanted to say that many fatal situations were needless and could have been avoided if the correct equipment was provided to the individuals.'

She said that when questions were first raised about troops being ill-equipped, Whitehall simply issued a statement denying any such thing.

It was only after the death of Sergeant Steve Roberts - the tank commander who was shot dead three days after being ordered to hand over his body armour to another unit because of shortages - that the official line was amended.

The truth was that the Government had delayed for five months before buying life-saving body armour for UK soldiers in Iraq.

'John would hear from journalists and families on many occasions that equipment was not adequate,' said Mrs Brooke, a retired teacher. 'He was told there were shortcomings in the body armour and with the vehicles.

'But John would speak to superiors within the MoD, and they would again tell him that the equipment was adequate and again issue the same statement or amend it to say that new equipment was being ordered.

'When it came down to it, it was all about spin - never about the truth.

'It took a grieving widow fighting for justice or a soldier's death before they would even consider telling the truth, or going some way towards it.

'Even then it was simply respun, packaged up and sent out.'

In 2006, the MoD defended its use of the Snatch Land Rover in Afghanistan despite claims that it was wholly inadequate in protecting soldiers from roadside bombs.

Armed Forces Minister Bob Ainsworth - now Defence Secretary - said other vehicles were 'not suitable for the task they were doing in the area in which they were required to work'. Mr Salisbury-Baker was again relied upon to push the official line that the Snatch Land Rover was an incredibly useful vehicle for entering the narrow streets run by the Taliban.

It was only after the death of intelligence officer Corporal Sarah Bryant in a Snatch Land Rover in June last year that the MoD amended its official line, adding that it had ordered replacement vehicles.

Mrs Brooke said: 'John is an honest, sensitive and moral person, and he was having to peddle Government lies that soldiers in vehicles such as the Snatch Land Rovers were safe from roadside bombs, which made him very stressed indeed.'

He began to suffer from angina and has since been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. He went on sick leave in August 2007 and is on half-pay.

He is now suing the MoD for disability discrimination, on the grounds that the stress of what he was being asked to do effectively made him disabled. He will attend an employment tribunal later this year.

A spokesman for the MoD said: 'It would be inappropriate to comment when proceedings are pending.'









