Tony Blair and Iraq: The damning evidence
Source: Independent
Hitherto unseen evidence given to the Chilcot Inquiry by British intelligence has revealed that former prime minister Tony Blair was told that Iraq had, at most, only a trivial amount of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and that Libya was in this respect a far greater threat.
Intelligence officers have disclosed that just the day before Mr Blair went to visit president George Bush in April 2002, he appeared to accept this but returned a "changed man" and subsequently ordered the production of dossiers to "find the intelligence" that he wanted to use to justify going to war.
This and other secret evidence (given in camera) to the inquiry will, The Independent on Sunday understands, be used as the basis for severe criticism of the former prime minister when the Chilcot report is published.
Mr Blair is said to have "realised" and "understood" that Libya was the real threat and that he knew "it would not be sensible to lead the argument on Saddam and the WMD issue" according to evidence of a conversation on 4 April 2002, the day before he flew to the US to spend a weekend with Mr Bush.
Read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tony-blair-and-iraq-the-damning-evidence-8563133.html
Bosonic
(3,746 posts)Or at least some form of punitive fine?
LeftishBrit
(41,203 posts)And no, I don't expect him to be brought to justice in any way.
deminks
(11,014 posts)skydive forever
(443 posts)if he was eventually held accountable and our very own war criminals never were?
chuckstevens
(1,201 posts)If Blair were sent to the Hague for a war crimes trial, would that not finally expose the truth about Bush and Cheney to the world?
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)unlike the US.
krkaufman
(13,433 posts)I'm pretty sure "the world" is already well aware of the criminality of the Bush/Cheney regime, minus the subset known as the USofA -- and I expect our media would continue to protect us from such unpleasantness, were such a trial to happen.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Denial, denial, denial.
blm
(113,019 posts)other matters involving military and foreign policy. The 'evidence' on Iraq didn't change from when Clinton left in 2001 to April2002. Clinton knew better and supported Bush every step of the way, including pushing Blair and DC Dems.
Solly Mack
(90,758 posts)krkaufman
(13,433 posts)This statement caused me to laugh out loud, it is so utterly ridiculous -- though, for my sanity, I'm going to hold out hope that "criticism" has an alternate, more favorable meaning in the UK, like "torch," "lift," etc.
Of course, the hawks here and there will all rationalize that the removal of Saddam and his entire regime was instrumental in getting Khaddafi to negotiate away some of his weapons programs and move towards normalized relations.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)underpants
(182,632 posts)I can't imagine that he is in any way impressive in person and certainly not what we saw of him.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,165 posts)was that he was to get a cushy position in The Carlyle Group weapons manufacturers after he eventually stepped down if he played along.
on point
(2,506 posts)cbrer
(1,831 posts)In Malaysia.
"Former President Bush, Former Vice-President Dick Cheney, Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the legal advisers Alberto Gonzales, David Addington, William Haynes, Jay Bybee and John Yoo that crafted the legal justification for torture that basically said, we can if we want to even if its illegal were the defendants. None were present, of course, but international war crime trials do not require the presence of the accused. The trial was run according to the standards set by the Nuremberg Trials to convict war criminals after World War II."
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/05/13/george-w-bush-dick-cheney-convicted-of-war-crimes/
Left Coast2020
(2,397 posts)Especially when it comes to putting a little extra cash in my pocket.
"Your Honor, I plead guilty and will accept Severe Criticism" as my punsihment.
underpants
(182,632 posts)tout_le_monde
(23 posts)as they shocked and awed iraq to death
Matilda
(6,384 posts)He still speaks in the same earnest pseudo-sincere way of the reasons why war was necessary.
I wonder whether he's trying to fool us still, or has he really convinced himself?