UK Inquiry: 
Blair Conspired with Bush as Early as February 2002 to Plot Iraq Invasion
By dlindorff
11/24/2009 - 

Most Americans are blissfully in the dark about it, but across the Atlantic 
in the UK, a commission reluctantly established by Prime Minister Gordon 
Brown under pressure from anti-war activists in Britain is beginning 
hearings into the actions and statements of British leaders that led to the 
country's joining the US invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Even before testimony began in hearings that started yesterday, news began 
to leak out from documents obtained by the commission that the government of 
former PM Tony Blair had lied to Parliament and the public about the country's 
involvement in war planning.

Britain's Telegraph newspaper over the weekend published documents from 
British military leaders, including a memo from British special forces head 
Maj. Gen. Graeme Lamb, saying that he had been instructed to begin "working 
the war up since early 2002."

This means that Blair, who in July 2002, had assured members of a House of 
Commons committee that there were "no preparations to invade Iraq," was 
lying.

Things are likely to heat up when the commission begins hearing testimony. 
It has the power, and intends to compel testimony from top government 
officials, including Blair himself.

While some American newspapers, including the  Philadelphia Inquirer, 
have run an Associated Press report on the new disclosures and on the 
commission, key news organizations, including the New York Times, have not. 
The Times ignored the Telegraph report, but a day later ran an article about 
the British commission that focused entirely on evidence that British 
military leaders in Iraq felt "slighted" by "arrogant" American military 
leaders who, the article reported, pushed for aggressive military action 
against insurgent groups, while British leaders preferred negotiating with 
them.

While that may be of some historical interest, it hardly compares with the 
evidence that Blair and the Bush/Cheney administration were secretly 
conspiring to invade Iraq as early as February and March 2002.

Recall that back in the fall of 2002, the Bush/Cheney argument to Congress 
and the American people for initiating a war against Iraq was that Iraq was 
allegedly behind the 9-11 attacks and that it posed an "imminent" danger of 
attack against the US and Britain with its alleged weapons of mass 
destruction.

Of course, such arguments, which have subsequently been shown to have been 
bogus, would have had no merit if the planning began a year earlier, and if 
no such urgency was expressed by the two leaders at that time. Imminent, 
after all, means imminent, and if Blair, Bush and Cheney had genuinely 
thought an attack with WMDs was imminent back in the early days of the Bush 
administration, they would have been acting immediately, not secretly 
conjuring up a war scheduled for a year later. (The actual invasion began on 
March 19, 2003).

As I documented in my book, The Case for Impeachment (St. Martin's Press, 
2006), there is plenty of evidence that Bush and Cheney had a scheme to put 
the US at war with Iraq even before Bush took office on Jan. 20, 2001. Then 
Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill in his own tell-all book, The Price of 
Loyalty, written after he was dumped from the Bush Administration, recounts 
that at the first meeting of Bush's new National Security Council, the 
question of going to war and ousting Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was on the 
agenda. Immediately after the 9-11 attacks, NSC anti-terrorism program czar 
Richard Clarke also recalled Bush ordering him to "find a link" to Iraq. 
Meanwhile, within days, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was ordering top 
generals to prepare for an Iraq invasion. Gen. Tommy Franks, who was heading 
up the military effort in Afghanistan that was reportedly closing in on 
Osama Bin Laden, found the rug being pulled out from under him as Rumsfeld 
began shifting troops out of Afghanistan and to Kuwait in preparation for 
the new war.

It is nothing less than astonishing that so little news of the British 
investigation into the origins of the illegal Iraq War is being conveyed to 
Americans by this country's corporate media-yet another example 
demonstrating that American journalism is dead or dying. It is even more 
astonishing that neither the Congress nor the president here in America is 
making any similar effort to put America's leaders in the dock to tell the 
truth about their machinations in engineering a war that has cost the US 
over $1 trillion (perhaps $3 trillion eventually when debt payments and the 
cost of veterans care is added in), and over 4000 lives, not to mention as 
many as one million innocent Iraqi lives.

Source URL:
http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/?q=node/421
Links:
[1] http://www.philly.com/inquirer/world_us/71316362.html


--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ShadowGovernment" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/shadowgovernment?hl=en.


Reply via email to