Leaked documents reveal No 10 cover-up over Iraq invasion

[teach1st]

Source: guardian.co.uk

Military commanders are expected to tell the inquiry into the Iraq war, which opens on Tuesday, that the invasion was ill-conceived and that preparations were sabotaged by Tony Blair's government's attempts to mislead the public.

They were so shocked by the lack of preparation for the aftermath of the invasion that they believe members of the British and US governments at the time could be prosecuted for war crimes by breaching the duty outlined in the Geneva convention to safeguard civilians in a conflict, the Guardian has been told.

The lengths the Blair government took to conceal the invasion plan and the extent of military commanders' anger at what they call the government's "appalling" failures emerged as Sir John Chilcot, the inquiry's chairman, promised to produce a "full and insightful" account of how Britain was drawn into the conflict.

Fresh evidence has emerged about how Blair misled MPs by claiming in 2002 that the goal was "disarmament, not regime change". Documents show the government wanted to hide its true intentions by informing only "very small numbers" of officials.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/nov/22/iraq-invasion-no10-cover-up

[patrice]

1. Details may have been foreshadowed in the Downing Street Minutes.

At the time, we heard only one detail out of the DSMs, that there was an agreement to "fix U.S. & British Intelligence" around the policy. I suspect the Minutes were quite a bit longer than that, so I have always wondered what else might be in there. It will be interesting to see if this "fresh evidence" parallels things in the DSMs.

[DavidDvorkin]

2. This sort of thing should be a giant bombshell

But I suspect it will fade away, instead.

[jasi2006]

45. Bush, cheney, Rice, Pearle, and several others should be named

as co-conspirators...the entire PNAC group should be named.

[blm]

50. Who was the most prominent American advisor to Blair at the time? Bill Clinton.

He was also urging DC Dems to support Bush on his war decisions.

[The Doctor.]

55. Prominent (not equal too) Influential.

≠

Which government agency was Clinton working for during that time?

(Not that I can't believe he'd be part of the mess, you've just failed to provide substance.)

[blm]

57. This was wellknown as it what happening - Bill influenced his good friend Blair AND the DC Dems...

You surely aren't implying that in 2002 Clinton had NO influence on either Blair OR the Dem lawmakers on Iraq, are you?

Prominent DOES equal influence when that 'prominent' person was a president who used his PRIVILEGED access to information to influence other leaders to go support the current president on his war decisions.

[The Doctor.]

66. Of course he had influence... but speaking in absolutes is below you.

Of course I'm not implying he had 'no influence'. I apologize if what I asked was not clear;

"Do you have any evidence he was at all instrumental in driving our allies to war with us?"

[blm]

68. I said he influenced Blair and the Dem lawmakers in DC.

This was wellknown and discussed at the time here and at every other forum.

And more recently....Do you not recall Daschle countering Bill's revisionism during the primaries when he claimed to be against the war from the beginning?

And, I speak in absolutes on this because it's common knowledge to anyone who paid even HALF-ATTENTION from 2001-2004 in regard to Bill's support of Bush.

[The Doctor.]

70. I meant the way one speaks in absolutes to elicit the answer they want;

"You surely aren't implying that in 2002 Clinton had NO influence on either Blair OR the Dem lawmakers on Iraq, are you?"

Tilting the discussion that way can be seen as disingenuous since one is forcing a concession rather than addressing the point which was; "What, exactly, did he do?"

I ask things like that because until I found DU in 2004, I only had cable news and local papers to go on. I ask DUers like yourself to help out and fill in the blanks for me on occasion.

As I said; I have little doubt he did something, but I am not aware of the degree of his meddling. I assume it is somewhere between; {Clinton} "Hey, Blair... just humor W, he's not that bright but just play along." {/Clinton} to; {Bubba}"Tony, this is serious. If you don't help fight them over there, they'll come blow up Big Ben. Now I'm willing to put cards on the table for this."{/Bubba}

[guitar man]

65. I'm afraid you're right

If all else fails they will call Britney and get her to show her cooch to the paparazzi again or cook up some other shiny thing to distract the public with :(

[katandmoon]

3. No worries for criminal members of the US government! Obama/Holder will protect 'em!

[alfredo]

4. It will be out of his hands because foreign prosecutors would file charges.

[katandmoon]

5. How will those foreign prosecutors get them in a foreign courtroom?

[alfredo]

14. Extradition treaties. also- look up the term "In Absentia."

If they aren't extradited they can still be tried.

[katandmoon]

21. We both know they'll NEVER be extradited.Tried in absentia? I'm sure they're QUAKING in their boots.

As long as the Bush administration criminals enjoy the full protection of the Obama administration, they need fear no repercussions of their criminal acts.

[alfredo]

31. He'd never be able to leave the US, and will be at the mercy of political

fortunes, and pressure from trading partners. There might be a day where the world community would put economic pressure on us to turn him over. Our power has peaked and we are starting to see that we will have to start paying attention to what other countries want and think.

[smiley]

34. you speak the truth

but so many on this site are blinded by the glaring eyes of the donkey.

[bahrbearian]

42. That "In Absentia." Really put a stop to Kissinger and criminals like him.

[alfredo]

62. You do what you can do. Not all criminals are brought to justice. That sucks

but that is the way it is.

bush's Calvinist beliefs prevent him from seeing any negatives from his behavior. Even if he was locked in a cage for the rest of his life, he will never accept blame for what he did. His every act was preordained, he was merely doing as God had laid out for him as one of the Elect. He was forgiven of sin even before he was born. Punishment means nothing. Locking him in a cage is not punishment, it is putting him where he can no longer harm us.

[24601]

54. True, after the 1990s Good-will bombing campaign, Bill Clinton

and 13 others were accused by Serbia of "war crimes". The specifics of the bullshit charges ..."include, but not be limited to, murder, ill-treatment ... of civilian population, ... wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity."

From AP - "Besides Clinton and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, those indicted include U.S. Defense Secretary William Cohen, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, French President Jacques Chirac, as well as NATO's former Secretary-General Javier Solana and retired commander Gen. Wesley Clark." (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/091800-04.htm)

After "trial" in a Belgrade district court, a conviction was secured and the sentence is 20 years. Presumably, there are places he doesn't visit or vacation because of the possibility of a longer stay than planned. Ya don't want to end up like Polanski.

So do I believe the US should start extraditing overseas? Absolutely not. If Serbia didn't want to be bombed, they shouldn't have participated in genocide. We all make choices and they chose poorly.

[Vidar]

12. I'm sorry to agree with you.

[Mari333]

15. +10000000000000000

[Rosa Luxemburg]

27. ?

[bertman]

6. That Geneva Conventions mandated duty to safeguard civilians in a conflict is now "quaint".

Recommend.

I hope this will lead to some eye-popping testimony by the Brits, but it will be ignored by the corporate U.S. media.

[penndragon69]

7. Only in Socialist Europe!

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

8. For the 6th consecutive year!

:woohoo:


In perpetuity.

[IndianaGreen]

9. plus the assassination of David Kelley!

We have known all this crap since the Downing Street memos leaked out.

Pelosi: impeachment is off the table!

The war in Iraq had the support of the political establishments in England and the UK.

[Nothing Without Hope]

36. I agree on all your points.

David Kelley was murdered.

[Gregorian]

10. I'd like to see someone discover the agreement. The price Bush paid Blair.

From the very beginning I've said that Blair gained something from this. What could it have been? How much? How paid? I feel that we're getting closer. The group of people involved was too big for complete permanent secrecy. This is why they wanted to keep the numbers of officials small.

It shouldn't take Pinochet years to discover the truth.

[FarCenter]

20. Cooperation in protecting the bankers of the City of London, UK oil companies and mining companies

The US and UK cooperate in a large number of activities in the areas of financial exploitation around the globe, plus exploitative extraction industries, especially in oil and mining. Australia is the third partner in this.

See also such things as the UK USA Security Agreement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK%E2%80%93USA_Security_Agreement

[ldf]

25. jpmorgan chase and carlyle group?

whatever happend to those options?

[JohnyCanuck]

37. See this excerpt from a recent aricle: "Why we Fight"

Today Britain continues to export capital on a scale unmatched by any other country apart from the United States. By 2006 British capital assets overseas were worth the equivalent of 410 per cent of Britain's GDP. This is the highest of any major capitalist economy. Much of this investment is in the United States and Europe, but a significant amount continues to be invested in extractive industries in Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Latin America. An even greater amount of money from abroad (mainly US) is invested in British financial and industrial companies, many of them now under external ownership. It is this interlocking of capital between the UK and the much stronger US economy which helps to bind UK and US foreign policy together. Britain's oil and gas giants, its mining companies and its arms manufacturers have a powerful and ongoing relationship with government and an effective lobbying influence in the office of successive Prime Ministers.

All of these strands come together with the drive for 'energy security' by the US and UK governments. It is the desire to protect overseas investments and control the strategic materials such as oil, gas and minerals that drive the foreign and defence policy of both countries. Britain no longer has the global military reach to defend its overseas investments. Increasingly it depends on the United States for this. The unwritten agreement is that, in return, the British government supports US policy around the world (emphasis added /JC). The same is true for Britain's biggest arms manufacturer, BAE Systems. It has grown rapidly in recent years to become the second biggest arms manufacturer in the world, mainly through the acquisition of other US companies. It now gets more business from the Pentagon than the MoD. UK support for America's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan certainly helps to oil the wheels of the UK arms business.

http://www.scottishleftreview.org/li/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=278&Itemid=1

[Gregorian]

64. Oh, another good one.

And these things appear to be legal. But if only we could find the (is it called quid pro quo?). Then it may turn into something far more sinister.

Thanks.

[disndat]

51. Don't forget

Tony Blair was put in office by Rupert Murdoch, so the fix was in from the start.

[90-percent]

52. Price of Blair?

Wasn't he appointed to the board of Carlyle Group shortly after leaving office? And isn't that a typical reward for serving the BFEE?

Just wondering.

-90% Jimmy

[Gregorian]

63. Right. I forgot about that. Thanks.

It's that kind of thing that very well may have been a reward. Proving it would be the thing I'd like to see happen.

[WHAT]

71. Then again, Blair could be blackmailing Bush...

acting nice and playing dirty seems part of the UK strategy...it's kinda an old tactic...or a classic scam technique.

things don't add-up with the narrative...

perhaps it's a prelude to the uk withdrawing from Afghanistan because Iraq was the real goal. And those oil contracts that went-on just recently, were Brit companies involved?

I think some thing else (more) is going on?

[Guilded Lilly]

11. I fear we have gone beyond

holding the past administration accountable for any of the multitudes of treacheries they have committed and brought to our country.

No political party or administration is devoid of stretching the law or tweaking the truth for their agenda, but this just goes beyond the pale honor-wise and humanity-wise. Such foulness has created such a deep distrust of anything and anyone in government. I doubt it will ever be healed.

Just what exactly CAN we do???? Nothing has stuck, nothing has worked, nothing has made these people accountable for their atrocities.
Infuriating
How many of our sons/daughters, husbands/ wives fathers/mothers lives have paid for this criminal behavior? They just don't give a shit, do they?

[peacetalksforall]

24. The reason they got away so far in spite of their continuity = meaning the same

group involved in Iran-Contra (and some may have gone back as far as the assassination of JFK, MLK, RFK including Vietnam) are the facilitators of choice throughout Republican administrations. The corporations are the same also - war weaponry and earth resources. However, they fine tuned tv, newspaper, and magazines corporations - the media wasn't as loyal to Republicans in the beginning. Mercenary contractors are rather new.

We have to reveal and repeat the names of players and be able to link details involving them - then post.

We have to teach each other, because trying to bring them to justice is not the end all if it is too late for the ones at the very top - we can still expose their facilitators - the #2, 3, 4 levels down. They are running around free. Look at Negotiant and Otto Reich (two of the worst and there are many, many facilitators - got themselves into the Hillary Clinton Sec of State circle with the overthrow of Gelya in Honduras. Grover Nyquist, Ralph Reed, Karl Rove are not on vacation.

We have to help make the case against them and support the international justice community.

We need that community to go after anyone they can.

Our best friends may be that international justice community because it is very hard to get those at the top to go after those at the top.

All of them have given themselves up to corruption. It's corruption - it is equally harmful to Cheney, Bush, Misfield, Halfwits.

Know who they are, their contributions, teach others. Participate and clarify on the details - follow the work of the international people who count for upholding justice.

[Sinti]

13. "safeguard civilians in a conflict"

They bombed Baghdad and encouraged us to watch it on television. Baghdad for the Iraqis is the equivalent to New York City for us - over 7 million people live there. It was mass murder on live television. The aftermath of the invasion was insult to injury.

They called that "Shock and Awe" - it came across the airwaves like it was the opening foray of a sport. I felt like I was being encouraged to pop popcorn and tuck in for a night of exciting entertainment. Then there's the baseball theme, trading cards (enemy and friend), and Rumsfeld as this 'baseball hero' with the press (that was their preferred frame), and all that propaganda distraction stuff...

Both administrations should be held accountable for war crimes, their media enablers should be held accountable, and the war profiteers (the big company men) should be held accountable. Why would anyone treat such an outrage so delicately?

[underpants]

16. "With us or against us"

Like "Shock and awe" it was meant for domestic politically consumption....and the MSM followed along just like they are supposed to

[Sinti]

18. Propaganda and social-engineering - I believe Goebbels would have been tried and convicted n/t

[rocktivity]

58. .

:rofl:
rocktivity

[underpants]

69. .

I'll count you in the "with us" group

:hi:

[democrank]

17. This makes my stomach churn.

To this very day, millions of United States citizens and the politicians who mislead them, defend the obscene atrocity know as the Iraq War. Many of our "leaders", having dutifully marched out and purchased flag pins, openly support torture on political talk shows. "Leaders" have bankrupted our nation and upheld policies that killed or maimed hundreds of thousands of soldiers and civilians.
We have used banned chemical agents, hired ruthless, bloodthirsty mercenaries and all but destroyed anything we ever stood for. Still, the haters scream for blood and the profiteers scream for profit.

The new administration seems to work feverishly to protect Bush and Cheney from being tried for war crimes and the lip service to our troops makes me ill. If we really cared about them, we`d bring them home, not send them back for two, three, four COMBAT tours.

How much longer are we going to let our future be determined by what happened on September 11th? The president should have a prime time address and tell the country that he will do all humanly possible to help this country stay safe, but nothing is 100% certain. Each citizen must stay vigilant but we must all move forward.

Right now we`re all hostages....to Bush and Cheney`s criminal actions, to our "leaders" lack of courage, to our bloodthirsty quest for revenge, to the political consultants` and image makers distorted version of leadership and to our nauseating adaptation of freedom.

[winyanstaz]

19. yup...and those of us on the left tried to tell the world about it at the time.....

..that it was all a made up pack of lies.... were mocked and called names like conspiracy theorists and tin-foil hat wearers..:P
I say when the truth comes out...heads should roll...or at the very least a trial or two.

[Solly Mack]

22. k/r

[lunasun]

23. Please prosecute

all these assholes for the war crimes they are guilty of!!!
BTW.> they are just shocked now???

[Rosa Luxemburg]

26. We knew that but nothing was done

the right have been so strong that people have been branded as conspiracy theorists if one enquires! The MPs knew what was going on except there were too many in Blair's camp. For a Labour Party, to go into a premptive war like that was unbelievaable.

Tony Blair was a disgrace - he was not Labour.

[Enthusiast]

29. Curious about this,

isn't it? "Tony Blair was a disgrace - he was not Labour."

Seems to be a lot of this kind of thing going around, on both sides of the pond. I mean politicians not representing what they actually are. Stealth and chameleon figures everywhere.

When I watch my TV news programs I get the distinct impression that the PTB are really a dark force, completely hidden and insurmountable, that prods the citizenry to believe they are free and have representative government, but only if they use the imaginations freely.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

30. He was not Labour

I don't know exactly who he was working for

[glitch]

67. Moles play an important part of any coup but especially the "bloodless" ones.

Quoted for heavy sarcasm, plenty of blood especially in Iraq/Afghanistan.

[FredStembottom]

28. Is Blair a known member of The Family?

That would explain a lot.

[glinda]

39. That would wouldn't it.

[FredStembottom]

59. You betcha.

[tnlurker]

32. K&R

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[Nothing Without Hope]

35. The majority of the American public will be kept ignorant of this by the corporate media

It's up to progressive independent sources to do what informing can be done.

[tekisui]

38. knr!~

[amandabeech]

40. Tony Blair desperately wanted to run the new EU government.

Gordon Brown did not support him in any way, but supported another Brit for a lesser position.

There is no love lost between Brown and Blair, but I wonder if Brown knew all along that Blair was toxic and was not going to support Blair's non-UK ambitions.

If that's the case, three cheers for Brown.

From someone who loved the Resolute paperweight.

[go west young man]

41. The UK is going full bore with Iraq in the news as Monday blooms.

This from The Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/feedarticle/8822447 Plus the Sunday Telegraph has numerous stories on U.S./British Iraq blunders, lies, and deception. Link here:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/ There's also this from The Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/iraq-war-probe-ready-to-name-and-blame--says-chairman-1825919.html

[T_i_B]

46. The floods in Cumbria are the really big news people are talking about.

More so then Iraq.

[JDPriestly]

43. No plans for governing the country after conquering it yet we were told

that our conquest would be a cakewalk. Also, many of our troops were not adequately equipped for crossing the desert or surviving serious chemical or biological weapons attacks. It was those facts that caused me to realize after the invasion that Bush had lied. I had trusted the government up to that point. I know. Stupid me. But I could not believe that an American president would commit our troops to a war in this day and age without good reason. I know. Stupid me. But the facts of the invasion itself even without these memos and this testimony prove that Bush, Cheney and Blair lied.

[fasttense]

44. Why does the UK insist on looking backward instead of forward?

You know I sometimes think we got the wrong person in office. We needed a fighter and in President Obama we got a compromiser. You can not compromise with evil. Yet that is exactly what President Obama does every day, that's what the Congress is doing when dealing with health insurance corporations, Wall Street and the Republicons. They compromise with evil on a regular bases.

We needed a fighter and we got a compromiser.

The only thing that gives me hope is that maybe when President Obama and the Democratic Congress are put into a position where their most deeply held convictions are to be compromised, they will fight back. Remember President Obama voted against the war. So, there was a line he would NOT cross in compromising.

[leveymg]

47. So, begin prosecuting them for war crimes, already.

[Hubert Flottz]

48. If we put all the war criminals in jail there wouldn't be any room to...

lock people up for smoking pot.

[Soylent Brice]

49. K&R

[defendandprotect]

53. How is the American corporate-press dealing with this, if at all???

[myrna minx]

56. K&R n/t

[denem]

60. Dupe. Delete.

Source: Sydney Morning Herald

RICHARD NORTON-TAYLOR
November 24, 2009

LONDON: British military commanders are expected to tell an inquiry into the Iraq war, which opens today, that the invasion was ill-conceived and that preparations were sabotaged by Tony Blair's government's attempts to mislead the public.

They were so shocked by the lack of preparation for the aftermath of the invasion that they believe members of the British and US governments at the time could be prosecuted for war crimes by breaching the duty outlined in the Geneva Conventions to safeguard civilians in a conflict.

The lengths the Blair government took to conceal the invasion plan and the extent of military commanders' anger at what they call the government's ''appalling'' failures emerged as Sir John Chilcot, the inquiry's chairman, promised to produce a ''full and insightful'' account of how Britain was drawn into the conflict.

Fresh evidence indicates how Mr Blair misled MPs by claiming in 2002 the goal was ''disarmament, not regime change''. Documents show the government wanted to hide its true intentions by informing only ''very small numbers'' of officials.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/military-chiefs-to-accuse-blair-of-iraq-sabotage-20091123-iy6d.html

---

Testament by Military Officers of war crimes is very serious indeed. It establishes a prima facie case for prosecution, which the British Government would be bound by treaty to pursue.

[Soylent Brice]

61. let's hope this happens, and then just maybe we might feel compelled to clean house ourselves.

*fingers crossed*