Chilcot inquiry

D

Dan Murray

Guest
Just saw Sir John's presentation.

He simply confirmed what I had always suspected.

I wonder what the appropriate consequences for Mr. Blair and by extension Mr. Bush should be?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
At least the report finally gives us the truth of what really happened.

I watched Tony Bliar's press conference this afternoon which I would characterise as a robust but futile and pathetic attempt to salvage what remains of his reputation.

I would urge people to revisit Robin Cook's resignation speech in March 2003 and then look at Mr. Chilcot's presentation today. Both available on YouTube.
 
I never really saw the point of the enquiry. Tony Blair brought his country to war on the basis of weapons of mass destruction which did not exist. It is irrelevant wether he did that mistakenly or knowingly. He started a war on an error.

What really sickens me is the families of the soldiers who are trying to blame Blair. If their sons had stayed at home hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis would still be alive.

I would urge people to revisit Robin Cook's resignation speech in March 2003 and then look at Mr. Chilcot's presentation today. Both available on YouTube.

Yes i had thought of Cook this morning. i must watch that video.
 
The report blames MI6 for bad intelligence and also blames Blair for acting on it. Seems to be expecting a bit much of Blair that he should know more than the professional intelligence services.
 
What really sickens me is the families of the soldiers who are trying to blame Blair. If their sons had stayed at home hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis would still be alive.

The same thought struck me - some very strange contributions on TV today from military families.

The report blames MI6 for bad intelligence and also blames Blair for acting on it. Seems to be expecting a bit much of Blair that he should know more than the professional intelligence services.

Quelle surprise....:)
 
I saw a brief (BBC?) video clip which showed Blair's car speeding through a pedestrian crossing with pedestrians hurling the "War criminal / War monger" accusations at him. Very appropriate in the circumstances of Michael Moore's reports which predate Chilcott who was rather more circumspect in his language. Looking forward to seeing Bush and Blair tried for their war-crimes together with their generals and advisors.
 
I would urge people to revisit Robin Cook's resignation speech in March 2003 and then look at Mr. Chilcot's presentation today. Both available on YouTube.
Indeed and while looking at that I couldn't help but wonder, if this report were to come out before the Brexit vote, could there have been a different outcome in the referendum? It has been a bad few weeks for Britain.
 
Looking forward to seeing Bush and Blair tried for their war-crimes together with their generals and advisors.
There's no legal mechanism for that to happen.
The International Criminal Court doesn't have that power and when it does it won't be retrospective.
If it can be shown that it was to policy of the UK government to commit war crimes in Iraq then Blair can be tried but it clearly wasn't government policy and British troops acquitted themselves quite well.

The families of the 179 troops who died there could take a civil case against Blair but it's very unlikely they would get anywhere as nothing in the Chilcot report is admissible as evidence so they have to start from scratch. Chilcot's report took 7 or 8 years and cost millions.
 
Indeed and while looking at that I couldn't help but wonder, if this report were to come out before the Brexit vote, could there have been a different outcome in the referendum? It has been a bad few weeks for Britain.

Who knows? Incidentally, did you notice Jeremy Corbyn sitting behind Robin Cook?

Getting back to Bliar, the soundbite PM - I'd say he is feeling the "hand of history" these days and that the "I will be with you whatever" will stick.
 
There's no legal mechanism for that to happen....

Above my pay grade to comment meaningfully.

It may very well be that the consequences for Bliar will be restricted to having his actions so forthrightly and publicly criticised (following a fair and forensic inquiry), together with all associated reputational damage. Being a form of persona non grata may well be his form of hell.

In addition, ordinary folk would suffer greatly trying to live with the consequences of what they did (i.e. did my actions cause unnecessary deaths?) - impossible for me to say to what extent this will apply to Bliar especially based on the performance at the press conference yesterday.

Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive....
 
And no mention of the disgusting behavior of successive Irish governments allowing Shannon airport to be used (abused) for rendition flights without inspecting any of the American military aircraft!


[broken link removed]

"In addition to some European states having hosted secret CIA detention sites, the report notes that a number were also involved in this global rendition network as the USA and its agents and contractors utilised their airspace and airports to illegally transfer detainees around the world. Ireland is included because Shannon airport was used as a stopover and/or re-fuelling point by CIA-contracted aircraft en route to or returning from rendition missions between 2001 and 2005. Flight logs clearly show that in at least five instances involving four known individuals, US planes, which were not carrying the victims of rendition at the time of entry, used Ireland as a refuelling stop en route to or returning from rendition missions. So-called assurances Ireland received from the US Government applied only to aircraft physically carrying rendition victims – no assurance has ever been given that the USA would not use Ireland as a staging post for rendition circuits. Successive governments have failed to establish an independent investigation into how Irish territory was so used by the USA to facilitate its rendition programme at the time, despite calls to do so from the UN, Council of Europe and European Parliament."
 
I'm no fan of BlIRA, the man responsible for the shabby GFA.

But the Mother of Parliaments voted for this war based on the falsehoods of the"intelligence" services. The scapegoating of the man himself is a show of sickening group hypocrisy and denial.
 
The collective turning away of heads (of both the Irish state and the majority of its citizens) that Werner refers to in relation to Shannon is hypocritical.

Those that believed that the case for war was not justified and whose views have now been vindicated are not being hypocritical. We are just happy that the tooth, the whole tooth and nothing but the tooth has finally emerged.

The inquiry found many errors in the lead up to the invasion. In attempting to somehow exonerate Bliar, DOM picks just one of these errors and points the blame elsewhere. In so doing, he is engaging in exactly the same type of selectivity that Mr. Bliar adopted with such disastrous consequences.

In any event, in relation to the WMD bit, Chilcot lays the blame on MI6. The spies over-promised about their ability to gather reliable intelligence. The agency realised that one of its key sources was a fabricator even before the invasion, but Chilcot says MI6 kept this concealed not just from the public, but also from Bliar.

However, and importantly, the inquiry also found that Bliar had been given warnings, including from senior members of his own staff, that much of the intelligence seemed dodgy and did not support a case that Saddam was an imminent threat. His culpability, in this particular regard, was to use his trademark evangelism to represent the bogus intelligence as compelling evidence that Saddam was a real, present and growing danger when he was not.

Again it's worth repeating that this was just one of the failings identified by Chilcot.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top