Still available on the web for download for the next hour or so at
Their speculation was that the stuff in the transcript apart from the 'bomb Al Jazeera' bit was criticism by Blair of the heavy-handedness of the recent American tactics in Falluja. In particular, they linked to a leak that appeared in the Sunday Times on May 24th, 2004 - "British Fears on US Tactics are Leaked". Even more interestingly,
Raw Story, when reporting the charge of Keogh and O'Connor on the 17th November 2005, said it was for that leak to the Sunday Times (which is no longer available from the Sunday Times (you need a subscription for the archives), but Raw Story has reproduced it in full). That was also the document the
BBC said the two had been charged, and
Reuters via ABC, and
The Guardian hinted at that too.
However, The Independent said on the 18th November the charge was because of a Bush-Blair conversation (saved via
Russian mirror site since The Independent also charges for its archives).
Meanwhile, when
the Sunday Times reported the charging on the 2 men last Sunday, they said:
The document is said to be the transcript of a conversation between Tony Blair and President George Bush in spring 2004. It is believed to show Blair disagreed with Bush over their strategy on Iraq.
The men also revealed sensitive information on the situation in Iraq, including intelligence sources and details of future military movements.
Last week several media organisations claimed the information had also been leaked to The Sunday Times. However, the Metropolitan police, Crown Prosecution Service and Clarke said this was not the case.
and I suppose they ought to know. But maybe that means that the gist of the disagreement was the same as the Foreign Office memo leaked to the Sunday Times, and some of the media jumped to the conclusion that was what it was, having heard of the 'heavy-handed' complaint. Those appear to be the main reports of the charge before the Mirror revealed the al Jazeera link.