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

[Magda Hassan]

I think it will come out with a whimper by the time the lawyers have picked over it.

[David Guyatt]

Oh dear, is Tony in trouble?

Tony Blair 'could face war crimes charges' over Iraq War

Lord Dykes asked: 'Is my noble friend aware that more and more people think it is some kind of attempt to prolong the agony of Mr Blair facing possible war crimes charges?'

[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="class: gig-button-td"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][COLOR=#565656 !important][FONT=Arial !important]3K
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="class: gig-button-td"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][COLOR=#565656 !important][FONT=Arial !important]833[/FONT][/COLOR]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="class: gig-button-td"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][COLOR=#565656 !important][FONT=Arial !important]2[/FONT][/COLOR]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="class: gig-button-td"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][COLOR=#565656 !important][FONT=Arial !important]13[/FONT][/COLOR]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="class: gig-button-td"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][COLOR=#565656 !important][FONT=Arial !important]4K[/FONT][/COLOR]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Email
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


Tony Blair led the British invasion of Iraq in 2003 Photo: Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images






[/FONT][/COLOR]


By Christopher Hope, Senior Political Correspondent

3:56PM GMT 06 Jan 2015

1450 Comments


Tony Blair could face war crimes charges as a result of the Iraq war inquiry report, the House of Lords has been told.

Lord Dykes of Harrow Weald, a Liberal Democrat peer, claimed that the publication of the inquiry by Sir John Chilcot was being delayed "to prolong the agony" of the former Labour Prime Minister.

Lord Hurd who as Douglas Hurd was Conservative foreign secretary from 1989 to 1995 said the delay was now "becoming a scandal".

Lord Wallace of Saltaire, a Government minister, disclosed for the first time that talks over the publication of the gist of conversations between Mr Blair and George W Bush, the former US president, were now completed.

These talks have held up the publication of the report. But he said that if the report is not published by the end of February, it will be delayed until after the general election.

Related Articles

• 
  
  
• Tony Blair cuts his tax bill despite another bumper year
  06 Jan 2015
  
• CIA torture: Blair and Straw 'must account for what they knew'
  13 Dec 2014
  
• Iraq War inquiry delays cost tens of thousands of pounds a week
  28 Jun 2014
  
• The PM must win allies at home to fight Isil
  16 Sep 2014
  
• EE has London working double time
  Sponsored by EE
  

Speaking in the House of Lords, Lord Dykes who as Hugh Dykes was a Tory MP from 1979 to 1997 - asked: "Is not this continuing delay an utter and total disgrace and so much time has elapsed?
"Is my noble friend aware that more and more people think it is some kind of attempt to prolong the agony of Mr Blair facing possible war crimes charges?"
Lord Hurd added: "This has dragged on beyond the questions of mere negligence and forgiveable delay it is becoming a scandal.
"This is not something which is of trivial importance, it is something which a large number of people in this country look anxiously for truth."
Lord Wallace of Saltaire, a Government minister, replied that the Chilcot inquiry was not delayed compared to other recent comparable reports.
He said that the £24million Al Sweady report into alleged maltreatment of Iraqis by British troops took five years report "on two battles in one afternoon".
The £13.5million Baha Mousa "inquiry looking into the death in UK custody of one Iraqi civilian in September 2003 took three years".
He added: "This [Chilcot] inquiry has been looking at nine years of british policy and operations within Iraq, it has not entirely unexpected that it has turned out to take a long time."
Lord Wallace said the timing of the report's publication was in the hands of the Government but he hoped "we are very close to the finishing line".
He added: "It would be inappropriate for it to be published if it is submitted within the next few weeks after the end of February unitl after the election because part of the previous government's commitment was there woul dbe time allowed for substantial consultation and debate of this enormous report when it is published."
Lord Wallace added that the one million word report will contain details of discussions of more than 200 Cabinet meetings.
The delay so far was caused in part because the inquiry did not have enough staff to leaf through the huge pile of documents required.

I do wonder if he knowingly personally profited from the war and that this is the problem being kept out of public view?

But I still don't think anything will really flow from the report.

[David Guyatt]

Of course, there are other or perhaps additional reasons why the publication of the Chilcott report is being pushed back until after the next general election in May 2015. See my post no. 647 HERE.

The fact that the Westminster/VIP paedophile inquiry announced by Home DSecretary, Theresa May, is now almost certainly backtracked until after the May general election - and very likely forever after - may be add a persuasive dimension to this angle?

[Magda Hassan]

Oh dear, is Tony in trouble?

Tony Blair 'could face war crimes charges' over Iraq War

I do wonder if he knowingly personally profited from the war and that this is the problem being kept out of public view?

But I still don't think anything will really flow from the report.

Well he has certainly benefited from the war after the fact. Nice little earner.

Some one showed me this link the other day which is also intriguing: http://asiancorrespondent.com/91064/tony...ance-tour/ I particularly liked this bit:

Mark Farmaner at Burma Campaign UK wrote in an email however that the visit was lacking in many respects. "Blair doesn't seem to have bothered to meet any grassroots or human rights groups before meeting Thein Sein and government representatives." He said also that the group hoped Blair would be there "on behalf of his Faith Foundation, perhaps in response to the recent anti-Muslim and anti Rohingya nationalism from some Burmese Buddhists. However, he hasn't met with any Rohingya representatives before meeting the government or others, which seems strange."

[David Guyatt]

Chilcot has announced that his report will now not be published until after the next general election in May. The fear is that Blair, and others ("key establishment figures), are thought to be working behind the scenes to water-down the report and lessen the criticism.

Such have been the delays in publishing this report that it is hard not conclude that a very nasty level of self-enrichment took place over the Iraq war -- as indeed appears to have been the case over the Arms to Iraq version 1, back in the 1980's, and the corresponding less than hard hitting Scott report.

The latter clearly demonstrated that the Thatcher government armed Saddam even as the air war phase of the 1st Iraq (Gulf) war was happening. And then sent in British tanks to face British made anti-tank shells (train loads of 155 millimetre sabot discarding). Who got rich from this and the earlier Iran-Iraq war of the mid 1980's, I wonder?

Corruption in politics is a very nasty thing. Massive party-wide and establishment-wide corruption completely undermines democracy. I fear that this is the reason for these continuing delays. And based on the comments of both the Lib-Dems and Conservatives, those who have most to lose are Tony Blair and, as a consequence, the Labour Party. Both are fairly silent over the delay in Chilcot's report and the assumption must be that both are bringing pressure to bear on diluting the report and delaying its publication until after the May election. This pressure could, realistically, impact on hitherto unknown aspects of prior arms scandals that could still damage the Conservatives, so frankly, I don't buy into the Conservatives crocodile tears over this delay announced today. The Conservative party - the original "Self-Enrichment party" started the illegal arms game back in the 1980's with the Iraq-Iran war. Blair, it seems, carried it on? And who knows what is happening in the current Conservative Party when it comes to arms exports?

From bbc.co.uk/news:

Newspaper headlines: Chilcot Inquiry delay and page three debate rumbles on

By Andy McFarlaneBBC NewsContinue reading the main storyAs it emerges the Chilcot inquiry into the 2003 Iraq War will not report until after May's election, some newspapers record the outrage of those who have been demanding its conclusions. The Independent quotes former Lib Dem minister Norman Baker calling it a "betrayal of the British public".
Continue reading the main story

1/12

Sir John Chilcot's decision to delay publication of the report into the UK's involvement in the 2003 Iraq War until after May's general election provokes strong front-page reaction.
The Independent points out Sir John chaired the inquiry's last session in February 2011, closing with a promise to report back in "some months". Given the hearings began in 2009, former shadow home secretary David Davis tells the paper: "Frankly this isn't good enough. It is incomprehensible as to why this is being delayed. We need to know why."
"Much of the most recent delay was understood to be down to protracted disagreements between Whitehall and the US State Department over declassifying communications between George W Bush and Tony Blair before, during and after the Iraq war," the paper says.

According to the Guardian, some arguethat their publication "would represent an unprecedented breach of confidence concerning one of the most sensitive episodes in British foreign relations". It adds: "Chilcot is understood to have sent 'Salmon letters' to those who were to be criticised to give them an opportunity to respond before the report's publication, which will have led to further delays following objections from those criticised."
Former Prime Minister Mr Blair has insisted he is not behind the delay and is "determined to rebut the argument that he lied to parliament" over intelligence he used to present the case for war to parliament, the paper says. The Daily Mail pictures Mr Blair smiling among British troops in the Iraqi port of Umm Qasr during the conflict in May 2003.
Senior Whitehall figures had warned the report would be too politically contentious to publish close to polling day, says the Mail. "Labour strategists are said to have been concerned at the prospect of the spectre of Iraq being raised in the months before the election, since the conflict was blamed for driving many of its voters in of the arms of the Liberal Democrats in 2005 and 2010," it adds.

[David Guyatt]

In answer to the question asking has he delayed the publication of the Chilcot report until after the General Election, Blair's office puts out a statement that says (in part):

While we do not intend to provide a running commentary on the process involved in the publication of the report, it is important to state the following for the sake of clarity. We have repeatedly said that it is not true to say that Tony Blair has caused the delay in the report's publication."[quote]

What's wrong with this statement? Well, for one thing he isn't saying it - his un-breathing 'office" is - and Blair can't, therefore, be accused of lying. Secondly, for the sake of clarity, having his "office" state that it, the "office", has repeatedly said that it is not true that Tony Blair has caused the delay in the reports publication" is just more misdirection and also meaningless.

It seems evident that Blair is the one delaying the report and that the media know it. But what are they not telling us, I wonder?

[quote]
Watch Tony Blair get increasingly irritated when asked about Iraq war report



The former PM told reporters at Davos to read his statement

KIRAN MOODLEY

Wednesday 21 January 2015

With David Cameron blaming the Labour party for the controversial decision to delay publication of the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq War until after the May general election, it was only wise to question the man who took the country to war.

Tony Blair was asked by reporters about the delay to the inquiry as he left a building at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
"I've put out a statement, go and see it," Blair responds as he heads towards his car. Several reporters continue to follow him and ask questions such as "Did you cause the delay?" and "Do voters have a right to know the contents of the report before the general election?"
Eventually, as he nears his car, he turns around and repeats, in a somewhat irritated tone, "I've just told you. I've put out a statement so you can go and read the statement."
The statement released by Blair's office read, "While we do not intend to provide a running commentary on the process involved in the publication of the report, it is important to state the following for the sake of clarity. We have repeatedly said that it is not true to say that Tony Blair has caused the delay in the report's publication."

MPs expressed anger over the latest delay, with the Prime Minister pointing the finger of blame at the Labour Government headed by Gordon Brown. Cameron told the inquiry chairman Sir John Chilcot: "Had the previous Government established this inquiry when I first called for it, we would not be in this position today. But that cannot now be undone."
At Prime Minister's Questions, Hackney MP Dianne Abbott and others questioned the time Sir John had taken to deliver his report, calling it a "scandal" that was threatening public confidence in the inquiry system.
Mr Cameron said that it was not up to him to decide the timing of an independent report, but added: "My feeling is there is no mystery as to why it is taking so long, it is a very thorough report and you have to follow the proper processes.
"I don't believe anyone is trying to dodge this report or put off this report."
The debate in the Commons came after Sir John confirmed thathis investigation would not be completed before the election.

I'm unable to embed the associated film clip so those who want to watch Bliar should visit The Independent.

[David Guyatt]

The Indy has a long series of article that it claims will be the only equivalent Chilcot Report this side of the general election. I'm not going to post it because it is so full of the usual western propaganda on 9/11 -- packaged as established fact in the normal way our media consistently lie to us -- that I just can't bring myself to assist in its distribution. But for those who wish to have a peed the articles are HERE.

From this it seems evident that we can forget the brouhaha about Chilcot's report. When it is eventually published, it's just going to be another expensive version of old cobblers paid for by the tax-payers (without their consent obviously).

No one, including a high court judge will step off message? No now. Not ever.

[David Guyatt]

I've been here before - in the first Iraq Inquiry on the Thatcher years arms trading with Iran & Iraq. The Scott report was hailed - in advance - as being devastating to the pols of the day, and come out like a limp sail in the doldrums. So I'm not holding my breath this will be any different.

'More than 30 politicians and officials' to be criticised in Iraq inquiry report

Number 10 sources expect the report to be a 'devastating' indictment of the Blair Government and large sections of the Whitehall establishment

[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="class: gig-button-td"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD]

[COLOR=#565656 !important][FONT=Arial !important]0

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="class: gig-button-td"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD]

[COLOR=#565656 !important][FONT=Arial !important]0[/FONT][/COLOR]

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="class: gig-button-td"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD]

[COLOR=#565656 !important][FONT=Arial !important]0[/FONT][/COLOR]

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="class: gig-button-td"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD]

[COLOR=#565656 !important][FONT=Arial !important]0[/FONT][/COLOR]

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="class: gig-button-td"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD]

[COLOR=#565656 !important][FONT=Arial !important]0[/FONT][/COLOR]

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]Email
[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]



Sir John Chilcot, who led the Iraq Inquiry Photo: PA/David Cheskin






[/FONT][/COLOR]


By Christopher Hope, Chief Political Correspondent

5:14PM GMT 08 Feb 2015
Follow
188 Comments


More than 30 senior politicians and officials including former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair are set to be heavily criticised in a "devastating" official report into the Iraq War.

Last week, Sir John Chilcot, the panel's chairman, said that no more than 150 politicians and officials would be criticised in the final report but he declined to give an exact number.

However, one Sunday newspaper said "approximately 30" people have been sent letters by the inquiry's panel chaired, warning them they are likely to be criticised.

The Mail on Sunday reported that the number could also include Jack Straw, who was the foreign secretary between 2001 and 2006, before, during and after the war in 2003.

Other figures from the Labour Government who could face criticism were Alastair Campbell, Mr Blair's communications director, Jonathan Powell, his chief of staff , and Geoff Hoon, a former defence secretary.

Related Articles

• 
  
  
• Iraq War inquiry: The politicians and officials who could be criticised
  08 Feb 2015
  
• Timeline: How the Chilcot Inquiry has gone on and on and on
  04 Feb 2015
  
• Chilcot panel member Sir Martin Gilbert dies
  04 Feb 2015
  
• Sketch: Chilcot, Blair, Iraq, and the report that will definitely be published any year now...
  04 Feb 2015
  

Number 10 sources said they expected the report to be a "devastating" indictment of the Blair Government and large sections of the Whitehall establishment.
Some 7,000 will be published including 200 minutes from Cabinet meetings and 30 Blair/Bush notes. The inquiry was still working through a "tail of declassification".
One source said that Mr Blair's words "will be published word for word".
The source said: "There will be redactions where appropriate but it will be quite clear to see what he said and what he meant.
"Bush's comments will be less detailed but that is necessary as it is not up to Britain to publish details of what a US President says."
Last month Mr Straw suggested that criticism of the delays to the Chilcot inquiry could lead to the panel producing conclusions that were "more starkly drawn than the evidence".
Mr Straw was also branded a "liar" in the House of Commons as he justified Britain's involvement in the Iraq War.
Mr Straw was met with a volley of abuse from Respect MP George Galloway when he was discussing talks with the UN Security Council.
He intervened during a speech by Labour MP Paul Flynn to made clear "for the avoidance of doubt" that in November 2002 the "whole of the United Nations Security Council" judged "that there was a threat to international peace and security from Saddam's weapons of mass destruction".
As Mr Straw sat down Mr Galloway shouted at Mr Straw "You are lying". Mr Flynn added that it was "because they were fooled", adding that Mr Straw's intervention was "contemptible".
A spokesman for Mr Blair has said: "We have repeatedly said that it is not true Tony Blair has caused a delay in report's publication. It is an independent inquiry and it should be allowed to proceed with its work."

[David Guyatt]

We're well past the General Election and yet the Chilcott Report remains unpublished and in limbo. The party responsible is, apparently, Washington who have classified documents related to Blair's decision to go to war with the US against Iraq.

Me, I wonder if this is being done as a favour to Blair to give his wiggle room?

John Prescott suggests Iraq Inquiry chairman Sir John Chilcott should face MPs

By PRESS ASSOCIATION, 23 August 2015 9.05am.
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]


[/TD]
[TD]


[/TD]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="align: center"]0
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: gig-button-td, align: center"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]
[/TD]
[TD="align: left"]
[/TD]
[TD]Share
[/TD]
[TD]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="align: center"]0
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: gig-button-td, align: center"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]
[/TD]
[TD="align: left"]
[/TD]
[TD]Twitter
[/TD]
[TD]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]
[/TD]
[TD]
[/TD]
[TD]Email
[/TD]
[TD]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

• Lord Prescott.
  Getty Images

The chairman of the Iraq inquiry must be hauled before Parliament if he refuses to swiftly publish the findings, John Prescott has said.
Sir John Chilcot has faced intense criticism over the delayed publication of the report into the invasion but has so far refused to speed up its release.
Lord Prescott, who served as deputy prime minister under Tony Blair, said the length of time the investigation was taking was a "disgrace".
He called on Sir John to put the report out now, even if some of the witnesses object.
In his Sunday Mirror column, the Labour peer said: "I was one of the last people to give evidence in 2010 to the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War.
"Five years later we're still waiting for the report. And it's a disgrace."
He added: "I have been involved in a number of inquiries where those who gave evidence were given the right of consultation before the publication of the report, which is only fair. But five years and waiting is an unacceptably long period. It's an insult to the families of men and women who gave their lives for their country."
The delay in publication has been a growing source of frustration for Prime Minister David Cameron who has demanded a timetable for publication be set out "pretty soon".
Sir John insisted last month that his inquiry - launched in 2009 - was making "significant progress", although he could not set a date for the publication of his findings.
Much of the anger over the delay is focused on the so-called "Maxwellisation" process, which gives the opportunity to individuals facing possible criticism in the report to respond.
Lord Prescott wrote: "I believe as a participant in the inquiry that Sir John Chilcot should now publish his report even if there are objections from some of the witnesses. They have every right to put their case after publication.
"It is right that such independent inquiries should not be directly interfered with by Government or party leaders. However, since parliament endorsed the use of British troops in the Iraq invasion, costing the lives of many people, it should be possible for parliament to order its publication.
"If Sir John refuses, parliament should demand he appear to explain his reasons and put forward the statements of those who dispute the conclusions. These could then be put into the report and the public allowed to judge for themselves.
"I say publish and be damned. I want it, the families want it and so does the rest of the country."

Source

[Peter Lemkin]

Delay seems to be their main m.o., and I suspect it will be delayed over and over again..until it would be of the same historical interest as the man in the iron mask in the London Tower.

...after all, who now thinks much about the death of David Kelly, or for that matter Gareth Williams,...and so many others..