Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Iraq inquiry: secret documents showing Tony Blair’s frustration published

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 11:28 AM
Original message
Iraq inquiry: secret documents showing Tony Blair’s frustration published
Source: UK telegraph

Tony Blair’s irritation and frustration at being told that going to war in Iraq would be illegal have been made public with the unprecedented release of top secret Government documents.

On one note, written six weeks before the March 2003 invasion, the then-prime minister scrawled “I just do not understand this” alongside a warning from Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, that military force would be illegal without a fresh United Nations resolution.

In separate handwriting at the top of the note, a No 10 aide wrote: “specifically said we did not need further advice (on) this matter.”

The document is one of a number which were declassified by the Government showing that in the run up to the war, Lord Goldsmith was repeatedly told that his formal advice about the legality of an invasion was not welcome.

He had expressed reservations about the legal justification for a military conflict without the support of the UN for months before changing his mind on the eve of the war after flying to the United States to discuss the matter with officials working for President George W Bush.

Read more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/ir...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FiveGoodMen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bragi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
2. How sad for Tony
All he wanted was to go to war, but he had to read a bunch of legal crap about international law that he didn't understand. He must have envied Bush, whose staff made sure none of that legal crap ever made it to his office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selena Harris Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. No wonder Blair became a Catholic
The Vatican don't need no stinkin' rules, neither!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost Dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. Bingo.
(At least the poor fool thought he once had a conscience).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
COLGATE4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 12:58 PM
Response to Original message
3. Well, it's one more thing he and Chimpy have in common
a total disregard for the law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
4. Let us not taint such a greedy undertaking with any appeal to legality
We don't want this to look tawdry. And could you tell those dead and dying to keep down their screams of agony? Puts me right off my tea!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Braulio Donating Member (860 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. This brings up a serious issue
If the war was illegal, then a bunch of people can be put on trial and jailed, or even executed. This was done to the Nazis at Nuremberg. Now, if I get to vote on it, I say we take Clinton, Clark, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfled, and their associates and hand them over for trial by an International Criminal Court, because all of them were guilty of an illegal war at one time or another.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Clinton? Really?
What war did he start? He inherited the Somalia clusterfuck from his good friend Bush the Smarter. But otherwise he didn't intervene militarily during eight years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cosmicone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. What about Kosovo/Serbia? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Clark?
Are you talking about Richard Clarke? :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
5. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turborama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-30-10 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
12. The Independent: How Goldsmith changed advice on legality of war
For seven years, Britain has wanted to see how the legal case for invading Iraq was made. Yesterday, at a public inquiry that is going on unnoticed, official documents were released for the first time that showed the grave reservations of the Attorney General, his remarkable U-turn, and how the basis for the Iraq war was built on sand

By Kim Sengupta, Defence Correspondent

Documents about how the legal case for the Iraq war was formulated by the Blair government seven years ago were made public yesterday, revealing the grave doubts of the Attorney General over impending military action.

The drafts of legal advice and letters sent to the Prime Minister by Lord Goldsmith had been kept secret despite repeated calls for them to be published. Yesterday they were released by the Chilcot Inquiry into the war, after the head of the Civil Service, Sir Gus O'Donnell, stated that the "long-standing convention" for such documents to be kept confidential had to be waived because the issue of the legality of the Iraq war had a "unique status".

It had been known that Lord Goldsmith had initially advised the government that an attack on Iraq would not be legal without a fresh United Nations resolution. However, just before the US-led invasion he presented a new set of opinions saying that a new resolution was not needed after all.

Much more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/how-gold...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 17th 2014, 12:00 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC