Who leaked a secret dossier for Iraq war inquiry to the Sunday Mirror and why?

Thanks to British newspapers such as the Mirror and Daily Mail, the Iraq war inquiry has turned into a farce before it has even started. Someone has leaked a secret 100-page dossier to the Mirror, and the Daily Mail has published details of the same 'secret' report naming 'a Sunday paper' as its source.

How are readers able to determine whether a 'leaked secret report' is true or not? Surely the Mirror and Daily Mail ought to be investigated and fined for publishing details of a secret document written (by whom?) for former Army head Sir Mike Jackson. What was the leaker's motive, will s/he get away with it, and what has become of the Official Secrets Act, I wonder.

See Mirror.co.uk News report by RUPERT HAMER, Sunday, 28 June 2009 - Tony Blair and Gordon Brown to blame over Iraq war, says Army report - excerpt:

A secret report by Army bosses to be presented to the Iraq war inquiry blames Tony Blair and Gordon Brown for the botched occupation of the country.

The dossier - prepared for ex-military chief General Sir Mike Jackson - criticises then Chancellor Mr Brown for withholding funds to rebuild Basra for FIVE months after our troops went in. And the 100-page document attacks Mr Blair for "uncritically" accepting flawed US plans for the March 2003 invasion, which led to tens of thousands of deaths, including those of 179 British troops.

The report - Stability Operations in Iraq - will not be officially made public because the inquiry's head, Sir John Chilcot, ruled all documents will remain secret.

But the contents have been leaked to the Sunday Mirror. [...]

Note that (and thanks to eagle eyed Blair Supporter for pointing it out) the photo of Tony Blair published in above report is incorrectly titled as follows:

Tony_Blair_visits_gaza_pic_Getty_877785464.jpg

Here is a better photo, taken on the same day. The caption tells us that the photo was taken in Sderot, southern Israel. Why should one believe a word the Mirror says?

Photo: Middle East Envoy and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair looks at a display of rockets that have been fired at Israeli communities by Palestinian militants in Gaza, during a visit to Sderot, southern Israel, Sunday, March 1, 2009. (Source: Daylife Publishing/Washington Post Newsweek Interactive)

- - -

Here's another question. Did the Daily Mail plagiarise the Mirror's report or are they in cahoots with each other or what? See the following excerpt from the Daily Mail -
Army bosses blame Gordon Brown and Tony Blair for botched occupation of Iraq
By DANIEL MARTIN
Last updated at 3:11 PM on Sunday, 28 June 2009:

Army chiefs have laid the blame for the botched occupation of Iraq full square on the shoulders of Gordon Brown and Tony Blair.

In a devastating secret memo to the Iraq war inquiry, they say Mr Brown's refusal as Chancellor to release vital funds for the Army played into the hands of insurgents.

The report, written for former Army head Sir Mike Jackson, also attacks Mr Blair for 'uncritically' accepting flawed U.S. plans for the invasion when he was prime minister.

The 100-page dossier, Stability Operations in Iraq, will not be made public but its contents were leaked to a Sunday newspaper. [...]

The report will not be made public because the head of the Iraq war inquiry, Sir John Chilcot, has said that all documents sent to him will remain secret.

Finally, here is an excerpt from The Independent today that quotes Ben Bradshaw, Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, on his views re the upcoming Iraq war inquiry.

From The Independent
Sunday, 28 June 2009 at 08:41 am
Ben Bradshaw: Glad to be 'more Wagner than Wenger'

Does he think the Iraq inquiry should be held in public? His response is controversial. "To be perfectly honest I'm not convinced by the need to have one, because I think there will be people who will never be satisfied, and what people seem not able to accept on the Iraq war is that it's possible to reach sincerely and strongly held views on both sides of the question as to whether it was the right thing to do.

"However, an inquiry [having been promised by the Government], I accept there needs to be one, and it should be as open as possible."

How about Tony Blair's fears that it would be a "show trial" if held in public? "What his critics hate is the fact that they have never been able to pin anything on him. In my view they never will. Some people have just got to accept that they took a view on the war that this Government did not share and I think history will be the judge as to who was right."

I say, what a profound response. Well said, Mr Bradshaw.