The Iraq Inquiry

[Didz]

The Labour Government having failed to silence this inquiry by insisting it was held in private behind closed doors are now facing a growing crisis as the sheep who followed the flock during Tony Blairs reign of power sense that the game is up and try to save themselves by dishing the dirt on what really went on, and what they really thought at the time.

http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/

Some of the testimony coming out of this inquiry is quite shocking, and makes one realise just how lacking in personal integrity some of these people are. However, the facts, being revealed albiet too late to save the lives of the hundred's of thousands of innocent people are quite amazing.

Even John Prescott is making a bolt for the door in the hope of avoiding any blame for the situation we are in. "I do wonder, looking back now, having the privilege of discussing with Tony about all this - how did I then go along [with it]?".... "Listen, Bush is crap; you know it, I know it, the party knows it."..... "I did listen to some of the video links between Tony and Bush . . . and I mean, they can be hair-raising, because Bush has got his own kind of approach . . . It did make you think.".... "I've often thought, 'Well, you could have just said: Sod you . . . we're not doing it.'"

Asked whether Tony Blair bullied Lord Goldsmith, into declaring the Iraq war legal he answred: "If you say, 'Was Goldsmith a happy man about this?' - no, he wasn't."
[From an interview with The New Statesman - Prescott has actually managed to avoid giving evidence to the Iraq Inquiry - The one that got away.]
But then as Blair himself observed Prescott "could dance on the head of a pin and smile while he's doing it".

[Delvecchio1975]

Blair should be tried for this.

[Didz]

Sir John Scarlett, former Director General of the British Intelligence Service and head of the Joint Intelligence Committee at the time of 9/11 admits that Blair distorted the case for the Iraq war.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...y-dossier.html

"As the 45 minutes claim was new to its readers, the context of the intelligence and any assessment needed to be explained. The fact that it was assessed to refer to battlefield chemical and biological munitions and their movement on the battlefield, not to any other form of chemical or biological attack, should have been highlighted in the dossier. [it was I read it myself] The omission of the context and assessment allowed speculation as to its exact meaning. This was unhelpful to an understanding of this issue."

The original report clearly states that this claim was limited to battlefield weapons specifically the Iraq artillery, which had a maximum range of 20 miles. From memory the actual model and calibre of the guns capable of firing chemical shells was mentioned, but I can't recall the exact details now so I won't try and guess what was stated. It was explicitly mentioned that Iraq had no capability of attaching chemical warheads to its missiles, and this became apparently later when Iraq was firing them at Israel.

Sir John, admitted that the claim that Saddam could fire chemical weapons in 45 minutes was also 'lost in translation' [e.g. a diplomatic way of saying it was deliberately changed in the document produced for parliament.]

He conceded that it would have been 'much better' if the dossier had spelt out that the claim referred only to battlefield 'munitions' rather than 'weapons' - which was taken to mean missiles capable of hitting British bases in Cyprus.

[Delvecchio1975]

The weird thing is though that I, and many people around me, KNEW that they were lying their asses off to go to war? It was obvious from day one that it was bogus, made up and that the US and the UK wanted to go to war no matter what.

When will they be tried? Does anyone STILL think Blair would've made a good EU president? At least boring old van Rompuy doesn't have blood on his hands ...

[Didz]

I think the proudest moment for me was when the school children went on strike for the day in protest against the decision to go to war. I know their only children, and it was a day off school, but for me I thought that took a lot of organisation and political savvy to achieve.

Sadly, of course some of those same children will probably be dying in Iraq already and they will all still be paying consequences of that decision long after we're dead and buried.

[Mcgruder]

The weird thing is though that I, and many people around me, KNEW that they were lying their asses off to go to war? It was obvious from day one that it was bogus, made up and that the US and the UK wanted to go to war no matter what.

That was a time when Prime Ministers could actually say, 'this situation is so serious, we have to act now' and the rest of us would back him up. Those days are sadly gone now, Blair betrayed the that trust and has ruined politics as a result.

[Didz]

That was a time when Prime Ministers could actually say, 'this situation is so serious, we have to act now' and the rest of us would back him up. Those days are sadly gone now, Blair betrayed the that trust and has ruined politics as a result.

Actually, this was a time when Blair thought he had the power to declare war on Iraq without consulting Parliament. Someone, I think it was the Lord Chief Justice politely pointed out that the Prime Minister of Great Britain does not constitutionally have that power, at which point he reluctantly accepted the need for a Parliamentary debate to approve his decision. The problem was he had no real reason for going to war with Iraq, other than the fact that he had promises Bush to back him up, so he had to invent one, which the sheep in Parliament would accept, hence the 'Translation' of the report.

The Prime Minister of Great Britain has never had the power to declare war on our behalf, in fact they have no personal power at all under the British constitution. The sad fact, is that since Tony Blair came to power more and more of our constitutional safeguards have been stripped away by his 'so called' reforms to the point where most people, inlcuding the press, have forgotten how British politic's and democracy is supposed to work.

This business about the power of the Prime Minister is one of many myth's perpetrated by New Labour to by-pass our democratic processes. Another is the repeated claims that Ministers are elected by the populace and therefore can claim 'carte blanche' to make decisions on behalf of the people the Britain. Our friend Mr Blunket was very fond of using this arguement when he was Home Secretary, claiming that as he was an elected official he ought to have the right to overule the judgements of the High Court and decide on behalf of the people of Britain who was guilty and who was not.

[Admiral Piett]

It's odd how much more transparent the British government is than ours.

[Katsumoto]

It's odd how much more transparent the British government is than ours.

Yeah, I doubt there's ever going to be an inquiry into the Bush adminstration's dealings with Iraq, and they were the instigators of the war.

[B5C]

Yeah, I doubt there's ever going to be an inquiry into the Bush adminstration's dealings with Iraq, and they were the instigators of the war.

That is because what Bush did was not illegal in the United States.

[Martin N]

Good now all we need is a joint cell in guantanamo for blair and bush, i wonder how friendly they will be then ?

[Poach]

Makes me giggle watching all the politicians that were close to Blair desperately trying to save their own skin.

They're quite happy to stab him in the back now, what was so difficult about going public with this before the invasion? They made their bed on this one, I hope the inquiry recognises that they're only trying to save themselves now that they've been forced to answer for their actions (or inactions, as it seems for some of them).

[Poach]

It's more party solidarity, Didz. Blair had the Labour Party essentially as his personal army that backed him up anyway. He could and did make the personal decision to go to Iraq because he knew his party would just follow him anyway.

And yes, used that power to reform his own position in an attempt to make himself more like a President.

[Didz]

It's more party solidarity, Didz. Blair had the Labour Party essentially as his personal army that backed him up anyway. He could and did make the personal decision to go to Iraq because he knew his party would just follow him anyway.

And yes, used that power to reform his own position in an attempt to make himself more like a President.

Sadly, the compliance went way beyond the party borders.

One expects Labour politicians to behave like a lot of mindless sheep, they are conditioned to behave that way, but its clear from the evidence that even senior civil servants were Kowtow'ing to Blair and conforming to his wishes. For instance Scarlett admits that he read the introductory report to Parliament circulated by Blair, and noted the inaccuracies in its [translation] of his report, but did not consider it his place to say anything. Which he would know in government circles is tantamount to approval and acceptance of the content. In other words, he put his own self-interests above personal or indeed professional integrity and allowed a document he knew to be a lie to be presented unchallenged to parliament. He then set about covering his own tracks by silencing David Kelly who wrote the report and tried to do the decent thing by exposing the lies.

[Phier]

Based on how quiet the democrats are on the whole issue, I'm going to guess there is far more here going on then people know from the interweb.

[Admiral Piett]

Based on how quiet the democrats are on the whole issue, I'm going to guess there is far more here going on then people know from the interweb.

Not really. It's because they are not only almost equally liable, but also because the current administration quieted the backlash to evade the appearance of partisan discrimination.

Obama's stance on the Iraq war did not change once he assumed office.