The Iraq Inquiry - Chilcott's Circus Clowns Come to Town

[David Guyatt]

That's going to put Chilcott in a difficult spot isn't it.

I feel sure there is an unwritten, but accepted Parliamentary practice that former Prime Minister's will not be subjected to a botty spanking.

I suppose that Goldsmith sensed the Guillotine being oiled and thought, "ooops, time to make a bolt for it".

Off with their heads...

Figuratively speaking of course.

[Jan Klimkowski]

That's going to put Chilcott in a difficult spot isn't it.

I feel sure there is an unwritten, but accepted Parliamentary practice that former Prime Minister's will not be subjected to a botty spanking.

I suppose that Goldsmith sensed the Guillotine being oiled and thought, "ooops, time to make a bolt for it".

Off with their heads...

Figuratively speaking of course.

Most apparatchiks accept their lot in life and live according to the principle of BOHICA!

Bend Over Here It Comes Again!

It appears that Goldsmith has had enough of bending over, and is seeking to protect his reputation.

I doubt this will go down well. As the game plays out, I suspect Goldsmith was a designated patsy - expendable and potential collateral damage.

I'm also sure that this apparatchik was not meant to make it crystal clear that the British PM, Blair, was lying.

No wonder spinmeister Campbell is suddenly doing God, and promoting the pompous and puerile notion of Blair the leader with a Christian conscience.

A plague on all their houses.

[Peter Presland]

Here's another sign of flutterings in the Dovecotes of State. Tomorrows appearance ought to be interesting, though I've no doubt there are furious behind-the-scenes manoeuvrings to ensure that any damage is channeled in carefully charted directions. Does SEEM to have potential to get messy though.

From Tuesday's Guardian:

Britain's top civil servant, Sir Gus O'Donnell, is preventing the official inquiry into the Iraq invasion from publishing notes sent by Tony Blair to George W Bush - evidence described by the inquiry as of "central importance" in establishing the circumstances that led to war.
O'Donnell, the cabinet secretary, consulted Blair before suppressing the documents, it emerged tonight. The Cabinet Office said: "There is an established convention covering papers of a previous administration whereby former ministers would normally be consulted before release of papers from their time in government." The prime minister's spokesman said David Cameron had not been consulted.
Raising the stakes ahead of Blair's recall on Friday, Sir John Chilcot, the inquiry's chairman, released a sharp exchange of letters with O'Donnell in which he repeated requests for the notes to be declassified. Chilcot said: "The material requested provides important, and often unique, insights into Mr Blair's thinking and the commitments he made to President Bush, which are not reflected in other papers."
In a letter dated 6 January, his third to O'Donnell in less than a month, Chilcot wrote: "The question when and how the prime minister made commitments to the US about the UK's involvement in military action in Iraq and subsequent decisions on the UK's continuing involvement, is central to its considerations".
He refers to passages in memoirs, including Blair's autobiography, A Journey, and disclosures by Jonathan Powell, Blair's chief of staff, and Alastair Campbell, his former head of communications. Those publications, and the refusal to disclose Blair's notes, Chilcot said, "leads to the position that individuals may disclose privileged information (without sanction) whilst a committee of privy counsellors established by a former prime minister to review the issues, cannot".
Chilcot, who, with his four-member panel, has privately seen Blair's notes, said the documents "illuminate prime minister Blair's positions at critical points".
O'Donnell replied to Chilcot that releasing Blair's notes would damage Britain's relations with the US. and would not be in the public interest. "We have attached particular importance to protecting the privacy of the channel between the prime minister and president," he told Chilcot.
The Cabinet Office said the refusal to allow Blair's notes to be disclosed conformed to the inquiry's protocols. Chilcot said recently the protocols were "put in place to protect national security, international relations and the personal security of individuals. They are not there to prevent embarrassment."
In evidence to the inquiry last year, Campbell described the tenor of Blair's notes to Bush as: "We share the analysis, we share the concern, we are going to be with you in making sure that Saddam Hussein is faced up to his obligations and that Iraq is disarmed."
Campbell added: "If that cannot be done diplomatically and it is to be done militarily, Britain will be there. That would be the tenor of the communication to the president."
The inquiry has also heard from senior British diplomats that regime change was being discussed by Blair in meetings with Bush in 2002 even though, according to leaked documents, Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, warned that military action aimed at regime change, as opposed to disarmament, would be unlawful.
One document, previously leaked, notes that Blair told Bush at a meeting in Washington on 31 January 2003, less than two months before the invasion, that "he was solidly with the president". That was his response after Bush said military action would be taken with or without a new UN resolution and the day after Goldsmith warned Blair that an invasion of Iraq would be unlawful without a fresh UN resolution. Goldsmith subsquently changed his mind.
An inquiry official said: "It not about what President Bush told prime minister Blair. It is about what Mr Blair said to President Bush."
The inquiry has summoned back the former prime minister, to press him about what he promised Bush in private, and why he repeatedly questioned, then shut out, his government's chief law officer, Lord Goldsmith, after receiving unwelcome advice about the legality of an invasion.

[Magda Hassan]

:popcorn::cheer::moon2:
I am enjoying this immensely.

[David Guyatt]

O'Donnell replied to Chilcot that releasing Blair's notes would damage Britain's relations with the US. and would not be in the public interest.

And there's lies revealed the bollocks of Mandarin double-speak.

Obviously not being "in the pubic interest" doesn't actually mean that. The public would be extremely interested to know what's being said in their name.

What it means is that it's in the "interest" of a handful of senior public officials and even fewer senior politicians and their dribble-wipers - to protect their powdered arses from receiving the sudden discourteous arrival of swiftly moving public boots towards them, should they, the pubic, learn what really transpired.

[Magda Hassan]

The International Community = the US
The national Interest = the interest of the US and global capital

[Peter Presland]

O'Donnell replied to Chilcot that releasing Blair's notes would damage Britain's relations with the US. and would not be in the public interest.

And there's lies revealed the bollocks of Mandarin double-speak.

Obviously not being "in the pubic interest" doesn't actually mean that. The public would be extremely interested to know what's being said in their name.

What it means is that it's in the "interest" of a handful of senior public officials and even fewer senior politicians and their dribble-wipers - to protect their powdered arses from receiving the sudden discourteous arrival of swiftly moving public boots towards them, should they, the pubic, learn what really transpired.

Shades of the gross abuse of 'Public Interest Immunity Certificates' throughout the 'Arms to Iraq Affair' eh?

It's part of a carefully refined Orwellian use of language where things actually mean their opposites but, to the mass of the general public, have a certain comforting, reassuring feel to them.

'The Public Interest' actually means the interests of a tight knit cabal of Mandarins in pursuit of their hidden agendas.

It really does puzzle me how they continue to get clean away with it.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Let's deconstruct this pile of civil service "Yes, Fomer Prime Minister" tosh:

Whitehall chief blocks release of Blair's notes to Bush on Iraq

Sir Gus O'Donnell stops publication of documents Chilcot inquiry says are crucial to understanding how invasion happene

Richard Norton-Taylor
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 18 January 2011 19.36 GMT

Britain's top civil servant, Sir Gus O'Donnell, is preventing the official inquiry into the Iraq invasion from publishing notes sent by Tony Blair to George W Bush - evidence described by the inquiry as of "central importance" in establishing the circumstances that led to war.

O'Donnell, the cabinet secretary, consulted Blair before suppressing the documents, it emerged tonight. The Cabinet Office said: "There is an established convention covering papers of a previous administration whereby former ministers would normally be consulted before release of papers from their time in government." The prime minister's spokesman said David Cameron had not been consulted.

So, this was a decision taken by a civil servant, who is preventing both the British public and the sitting Prime Minister from seeing Tony Blair's letters and notes.

Let's be clear: these are letters and notes sent by Prime Minister Tony Blair to the American President George W Bush, which Chilcot describes below:

Raising the stakes ahead of Blair's recall on Friday, Sir John Chilcot, the inquiry's chairman, released a sharp exchange of letters with O'Donnell in which he repeated requests for the notes to be declassified. Chilcot said: "The material requested provides important, and often unique, insights into Mr Blair's thinking and the commitments he made to President Bush, which are not reflected in other papers."

So, even the carefully selected Inquiry Chair, Sir John Chilcot, is adamant that Blair's missives to Bush "provides important, and often unique, insights into Mr Blair's thinking and the commitments he made to President Bush, which are not reflected in other papers", and he believes they must be placed in the public domain.

In a letter dated 6 January, his third to O'Donnell in less than a month, Chilcot wrote: "The question when and how the prime minister made commitments to the US about the UK's involvement in military action in Iraq and subsequent decisions on the UK's continuing involvement, is central to its considerations".

He refers to passages in memoirs, including Blair's autobiography, A Journey, and disclosures by Jonathan Powell, Blair's chief of staff, and Alastair Campbell, his former head of communications. Those publications, and the refusal to disclose Blair's notes, Chilcot said, "leads to the position that individuals may disclose privileged information (without sanction) whilst a committee of privy counsellors established by a former prime minister to review the issues, cannot".

Chilcot, who, with his four-member panel, has privately seen Blair's notes, said the documents "illuminate prime minister Blair's positions at critical points".

In short, Chilcot is furious that Blair Chief of Staff, Jonathan Powell, can make selective public disclosures - presumably revealing those parts that place his former master, Blair, in the best possible light - but civil servant O'Donnell is refusing to allow the public to see the documents in their entirety.

Chilcot is clear that the British public should be allowed to see this material.

O'Donnell replied to Chilcot that releasing Blair's notes would damage Britain's relations with the US. and would not be in the public interest.

"We have attached particular importance to protecting the privacy of the channel between the prime minister and president," he told Chilcot.

The Cabinet Office said the refusal to allow Blair's notes to be disclosed conformed to the inquiry's protocols. Chilcot said recently the protocols were "put in place to protect national security, international relations and the personal security of individuals. They are not there to prevent embarrassment."

If releasing any part of the information created a genuine national security threat, then the relevant passage could be redacted.

Instead, mandarin O'Donnell has ordered that publication is prevented in its entirety.

This is CENSORSHIP pure and simple.

Chilcot is entirely clear. The inquiry rules are "not there to prevent embarrassment."

I will go further.

The inquiry rules are not there to prevent Tony Blair being publicly exposed as a man who said one thing to the British people and another to the American President.

Indeed, the rules are not there to prevent Tony Blair being exposed as a liar - if that is what the letters and notes establish.

In evidence to the inquiry last year, Campbell described the tenor of Blair's notes to Bush as: "We share the analysis, we share the concern, we are going to be with you in making sure that Saddam Hussein is faced up to his obligations and that Iraq is disarmed."

Campbell added: "If that cannot be done diplomatically and it is to be done militarily, Britain will be there. That would be the tenor of the communication to the president."

Even allowing for spinmeister Campbell's attempts to put the best possible construction on his boss' missives, that's pretty clear and damning.

The inquiry has also heard from senior British diplomats that regime change was being discussed by Blair in meetings with Bush in 2002 even though, according to leaked documents, Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, warned that military action aimed at regime change, as opposed to disarmament, would be unlawful.

One document, previously leaked, notes that Blair told Bush at a meeting in Washington on 31 January 2003, less than two months before the invasion, that "he was solidly with the president". That was his response after Bush said military action would be taken with or without a new UN resolution and the day after Goldsmith warned Blair that an invasion of Iraq would be unlawful without a fresh UN resolution. Goldsmith subsquently changed his mind.

An inquiry official said: "It not about what President Bush told prime minister Blair. It is about what Mr Blair said to President Bush."

The inquiry has summoned back the former prime minister, to press him about what he promised Bush in private, and why he repeatedly questioned, then shut out, his government's chief law officer, Lord Goldsmith, after receiving unwelcome advice about the legality of an invasion.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/jan/18...-tonyblair

Mandarin O'Donnell and Blair's onetime apparatchiks are doing their best to prevent crucial evidence being made available to the British people.

I sincerely hope they fail.

[David Guyatt]

O'Donnell replied to Chilcot that releasing Blair's notes would damage Britain's relations with the US. and would not be in the public interest.

And there's lies revealed the bollocks of Mandarin double-speak.

Obviously not being "in the pubic interest" doesn't actually mean that. The public would be extremely interested to know what's being said in their name.

What it means is that it's in the "interest" of a handful of senior public officials and even fewer senior politicians and their dribble-wipers - to protect their powdered arses from receiving the sudden discourteous arrival of swiftly moving public boots towards them, should they, the pubic, learn what really transpired.

Shades of the gross abuse of 'Public Interest Immunity Certificates' throughout the 'Arms to Iraq Affair' eh?

It's part of a carefully refined Orwellian use of language where things actually mean their opposites but, to the mass of the general public, have a certain comforting, reassuring feel to them.

'The Public Interest' actually means the interests of a tight knit cabal of Mandarins in pursuit of their hidden agendas.

It really does puzzle me how they continue to get clean away with it.

Did you ever read the Scott Inquiry reports Peter? I actually plughed through the whole lot. It was mind opening in regard to Mandarin and pol speak. The double meaning of various words commonly used in that sphere was really quite brilliant in its deceptiveness. The inner content of the report was also enlightening for its réalité, whereas the polished summary was just BS spin. And, of course, the MSM simply took the report handed out and published the polished spin.

That's why I think they know they can get away with it. A free press doing its job would've ripped them apart, but couldn't be arsed to do so.

[David Guyatt]

Blair is live in the chair at Chilcott's televised Circus and his interview is subject to a "one minute delay".

His questioner listens to an answer then says,

"It's just be pointed out to me that you have to quote from the actual paper, not from the one that is in the public domain".

Taadaa.

****

Later....

During the critical discussion over Peter Goldsmith, the Attorney General's recent comments re Blair's military action, the "one minute delay" button has just been pressed and words issuing from Bliar's mouth were scrambled.

The Circus has recessed for tea and crumpets.