Iraq war inquiry could reveal secrets, lies and the rush to war

[go west young man]

Source: The Guardian UK

When Tony Blair told the Commons that he hoped conflict with Iraq could be averted, he already knew the White House had picked 1,500 targets for its bombers. Gaby Hinsliff, Paul Harris and Jamie Doward report on the gaps between what the public were told and what politicians were discussing in private, as the government prepares for a closed inquiry.

The secret minutes of the meeting on which Blair was briefing parliament now confirm that the 1,500 bombing targets had already been chosen, the date for invasion set - and, most strikingly, dwindling prospects of a UN mandate for war were prompting some increasingly wild ideas on how to justify it.

It is precisely such gaps between the private and public versions of events that, many believe, would be exposed by an open inquiry into the Iraq war. Just as voters would never have known about the duck islands, moat-cleaning and address-flipping had they seen only the heavily censored expenses claims, Gordon Brown's critics fear a closed inquiry will also black out embarrassing truths. Today's revelations will only fuel the fire. Among those now backing a fully public inquiry is Sir Christopher Meyer, Britain's ambassador to Washington in the run-up to the war and a likely witness in any inquiry. He appears to have been copied into the Manning memo though he said yesterday he was not aware of the proposal to entice Saddam Hussein to shoot down a plane until later. However, he said it was an accurate reflection of the "pretty desperate" mood at the time. By this stage, he argues, the search for a so-called "smoking gun" on weapons of mass destruction was proving both unsuccessful and even counterproductive.


Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jun/21/iraq-war-inquiry-politics

[IndianaGreen]

1. Tony Blair wants this inquiry to be kept secret, to cover his ass, and...

he also knew and participated in, the torture program.

Under the Nuremberg War Crimes precedent, Blair would be swinging at the end of a rope, and he wouldn't be alone.

[jaysunb]

2. Sometimes it feels good to have been right

but the out come hurts too bad to gloat....

[IndianaGreen]

3. Looky here: No 10 denies Blair inquiry prompt

Gordon Brown has zero credibility, so his denial that he was not pressured by Blair falls on deaf ears.

No 10 denies Blair inquiry prompt

Downing Street has dismissed claims that a decision to hold an inquiry into the Iraq war in private was prompted by pressure from former PM Tony Blair.

The Observer newspaper says Mr Blair urged Gordon Brown not to hold a public inquiry because he feared being subjected to a "show trial".

Mr Blair's spokesman denied the claim, and Downing Street said it was "just plain wrong".

The inquiry will start next month and aims to indentify "lessons learned."

When he announced it on Monday the prime minister said the inquiry, chaired by civil servant Sir John Chilcot, would hear evidence in private so witnesses could be "as candid as possible".

But following widespread criticism Mr Brown later appeared to backtrack, saying it would be up to Sir John to decide which session of the inquiry could be held in public.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8111301.stm

[fedsron2us]

6. Since Blair's cronies were behind the plot to unseat Brown

two weeks ago at the time of the European elections I doubt very much that No 10 have much desire to save the former PM from being exposed as a liar and war criminal at any inquiry. Indeed, one might wonder if Brown was quite happy for the media to run with the story that he was 'resisting pressure from Blair'. While as Chancellor Brown sat in the Cabinet that rubber stamped the decision to go to war he is likely to have the defense that he was mislead about most of the reasons for attacking Iraq as the rest of the government and Parliament. Most of the dodgy dossier was cooked up by Blair's inner cabal at No 10 team of which Brown was not part. In fact an Iraq inquiry might divert the press and the public from all the other woes that the current administration is facing.

If I was Blair I might be time to start getting worried.

[shadowknows69]

4. Are they war criminals yet?

[madokie]

5. Yes Shadow they are

All of them and there is no parsing of words that can change that.

[glitch]

11. Then, now and forever.

That stain doesn't wash off.

[Gman]

7. If Britain exposes atrocites in collusion with the US

how long can the US public deny/ignore those atrocities?

[Chef Eric]

8. As long as the mainstream media want them to. n/t

[subcomhd]

10. You mean there are atrocities

we haven't already ignored?

[UpInArms]

9. remember Robin Cook resigning on March 18, 2003?

here's the last part of his speech:

Presidential differences

What has come to trouble me most over past weeks is the suspicion that if the hanging chads in Florida had gone the other way and Al Gore had been elected, we would not now be about to commit British troops.

The longer that I have served in this place, the greater the respect I have for the good sense and collective wisdom of the British people.

On Iraq, I believe that the prevailing mood of the British people is sound. They do not doubt that Saddam is a brutal dictator, but they are not persuaded that he is a clear and present danger to Britain.

They want inspections to be given a chance, and they suspect that they are being pushed too quickly into conflict by a US Administration with an agenda of its own.

Above all, they are uneasy at Britain going out on a limb on a military adventure without a broader international coalition and against the hostility of many of our traditional allies.

From the start of the present crisis, I have insisted, as Leader of the House, on the right of this place to vote on whether Britain should go to war.

It has been a favourite theme of commentators that this House no longer occupies a central role in British politics.

Nothing could better demonstrate that they are wrong than for this House to stop the commitment of troops in a war that has neither international agreement nor domestic support.

I intend to join those tomorrow night who will vote against military action now. It is for that reason, and for that reason alone, and with a heavy heart, that I resign from the government.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

12. Interesting that he thought Dumbyass was elected.

[IndianaGreen]

14. Time to reopen an inquiry into David Kelly's alleged suicide.

Tony Blair was involved in Bush's torture program from day one, and he conspired with Bush in dragging the UK into a war of aggression in Iraq. I wouldn't be surprised if Blair was involved in the murder of David Kelly. I never bought the suicide theory!

Our doubts about Dr Kelly's suicide

The Guardian, Tuesday 27 January 2004 03.02 GMT

As specialist medical professionals, we do not consider the evidence given at the Hutton inquiry has demonstrated that Dr David Kelly committed suicide.

Dr Nicholas Hunt, the forensic pathologist at the Hutton inquiry, concluded that Dr Kelly bled to death from a self-inflicted wound to his left wrist. We view this as highly improbable. Arteries in the wrist are of matchstick thickness and severing them does not lead to life-threatening blood loss. Dr Hunt stated that the only artery that had been cut - the ulnar artery - had been completely transected. Complete transection causes the artery to quickly retract and close down, and this promotes clotting of the blood.

The ambulance team reported that the quantity of blood at the scene was minimal and surprisingly small. It is extremely difficult to lose significant amounts of blood at a pressure below 50-60 systolic in a subject who is compensating by vasoconstricting. To have died from haemorrhage, Dr Kelly would have had to lose about five pints of blood - it is unlikely that he would have lost more than a pint.

Alexander Allan, the forensic toxicologist at the inquiry, considered the amount ingested of Co-Proxamol insufficient to have caused death. Allan could not show that Dr Kelly had ingested the 29 tablets said to be missing from the packets found. Only a fifth of one tablet was found in his stomach. Although levels of Co-Proxamol in the blood were higher than therapeutic levels, Allan conceded that the blood level of each of the drug's two components was less than a third of what would normally be found in a fatal overdose.

We dispute that Dr Kelly could have died from haemorrhage or from Co-Proxamol ingestion or from both. The coroner, Nicholas Gardiner, has spoken recently of resuming the inquest into his death. If it re-opens, as in our opinion it should, a clear need exists to scrutinise more closely Dr Hunt's conclusions as to the cause of death.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2004/jan/27/guardianletters4

[johnhkennedy]

13. Will this lead to Prosecution for Bush & CHeney as well?

It might.

There are thousands in the United States actively working to see that Bush and Cheney are prosecuted for their crimes. Having information come to light in Britain that helped indict Bush and Cheney here would be very welcome.

Millions of Americans wanted Bush and Cheney Impeached,
but our leading Impeachment Champion in the US House, Rep. John Conyers dithered for seven years and blocked Rep. Kucinich's Impeachment Bills from being debated or voted on.

We need to push hard for Prosecution of all of the crimes of the Bush-Cheney Administration

Especially Torture!


Not The Change We Labored For.

SIGN THE PETITION
To Prosecute Them For Torture

http://ANGRYVOTERS.ORG

Over 250,000 have signed
Join them and call yourself a Patriot

Will Obama stand for Justice or just get in the way of it?

.

[Senator]

15. We can (audaciously) hope.

And welcome to DU.

---