Thoughts After Chilcot 910


I hope today that people will remember Elizabeth Wilmshurst, Carne Ross, and Katherine Gun, who were all prepared to give up excellent careers to stand against the war in Iraq.

Blair is still a creature of absolute self-serving slime. His attempt yesterday to justify the invasion of Iraq as an effort to prevent a 9/11 on British soil is dishonest in every way. Blair knew full well that Iraq had nothing at all to do with 9/11 – that was his still friends and financiers the Saudi elite. The intelligence advice in advance of the invasion he received was unequivocal that it would increase the threat to the UK, and it directly caused the attacks of 7/7.

The broadcast media seem to think the Chilcot report is an occasion to give unlimited airtime to Blair and Alastair Campbell. Scores of supporters and instigators of the was have been interviewed. By contrast, almost no airtime has been given to those who campaigned against the war.

Cameron’s speech to parliament was such an out and out, and dishonest, apologia for the invasion that it bore no relationship to the report. Corbyn is no orator, but his genuine moral outrage was justified. The Blairites who heckled him from behind during his speech are disgusting. If any meaningful democratic choice is to be offered to people in England and Wales, the Blairites have to be removed from the Labour Party to join with their fellow Tories.

The SNP are playing a blinder on Chilcot. I do hope Salmond moves forward with impeachment, not least because it will both force the Blairites to expose themselves, and reveal the deep feelings against Blair’s actions in the military linked wing of the Tory party.

As predicted, Chilcot had to repeat the Butler Inquiry’s verdict that the intelligence was not fixed, because Chilcot was himself on the Butler Inquiry. It is a lie, the intelligence was knowingly fixed. More on that later.

I apologise these are very brief thoughts. I have not had the opportunity to pay the attention you would expect, as my mother has been taken into hospital and I had yesterday to dash down to Norwich. It will be a few days before I am able to concentrate on politics.


910 thoughts on “Thoughts After Chilcot

1 2 3 9
  • Neil

    Thank you for that, Craig. Your work here is appreciated, especially in difficult circumstances. I do hope your mother makes a full recovery. Look forward to seeing your fuller response.

    Best wishes.

  • ben

    hope your mum gets well soon and I look forward to your invaluable further thoughts on this issue.

  • michael norton

    Thank goodness for Ed Milliband changing the mood to stop our early intervention in Syria.

    I expect Dave Cameron is quite satisfied that post-chilcot
    he was held back by the Labour Party.

    • MJ

      Miliband was all in favour of invading Syria. It was his own backbenchers who swung the vote.

      • michael norton

        That is not the impression I gained from Ed Milliband
        i am fairly sure i heard his speech in Parliament ( on the wireless)
        and the way i remember, he was pashionate for not starting this venture.
        Perhaps i am mis-remembering.
        I would say it was one of the few things i admired about ed Milliaband.

        • MJ

          His first remark (it wasn’t in parliament) when asked about Cameron’s intention to invade Syria, was that he was right behind the government, or words to that effect. His backbenchers brought him round to a different view.

      • Shatnersrug

        That’s not true, he said if it were supported by a UN mandate which he knew wouldn’t happen. Miliband played tactical genius with the Syrian vote he led the Tories to believe he would vote with them, only to pull the rug out and leave Cameron speechless. Knives were out for him after that moment.

        The vampiric blood sucker “old” Nick Cohen accused him of being a Jew traitor and suggested that to not invade Syria would be the same as condoning the holocaust. Go figure.

        Miliband put levers in motion that would open up the Labour Party, he was anti war and an arch tactician – he will one day be seen as the man that saved the Labour movement.

  • IanF

    I listened to Clair Short on Newsnight on BBC last night trying, in vain, to justify staying on in Blair’s cabinet after the decision to invade. Her excuse was that she was promised by the hawks in the US that they would rebuild the country and provide humanitarian assistance by the bucket load (I paraphrase of course). Whereas poor Clair was not the “poodle in chief” to the US, it paints a depressing picture of the spinelessness and disinterest exhibited by all those cabinet place men and women – with the notable and honourable exception of the late Robin Cook. So, yes Craig – you are right to remind us of those brave officials who spoke out and did the right thing by resigning.

    Hope your Mum is on the mend soon. All the best.

    • giyane

      IanF

      I have written and spoken to Clare Short on several occasions on various subjects and received highly intelligent replies full of awareness of the double-think of politics. She’s not one to wear radical cynicism on her sleeve.

      I admire her for ability to detach her emotions about policshit from her work as an MP. I’m not able to detach myself from my hatred of it and who listens to me.

      Claire Short is a star of the labour party and should be valued as such. I admire people who can see through people like Blair and make themselves ready for doing good work, instead of allowing themselves to just get angry.

      • IanF

        Giyane

        I accept Clare could and does “see through people like Blair” – but – she did not, when it really counted, act upon it by resigning – as did Robin Cook.

        • Habbabkuk

          And what did Robin Cook’s resignation achieve?

          BTW, Mr Anthony Wedgwood Benn (aka, in his man of the people phase, “Tine Benn”) never resigned from the Wilson and Callahan govts despite being in disagreeing with most of what they did, according to his diaries….

          • glenn_uk

            Come on, did either of those governments commit the greatest of all crimes (according to the verdicts of the Nuremberg Trials), which was to wage a war of aggression? That’s a rather more serious matter than differences on policy.

  • Canexpat

    “Blair knew full well that Iraq had nothing at all to do with 9/11 – that was his still friends and financiers the Saudi elite.”

    I’m not sure the ‘Saudi elite’ had the access to schedule over twenty NORAD drills on that day Craig. Nor, as far as I know, did they have placemen capable of preventing a criminal investigation and shipping the scrap steel immediately to China. I’m pretty sure 200 Saudi agents were not rolled up by the FBI in the few months following the events in New York. Does the fact that the Bush administration was riddled with dual citizen Neocons placed in exactly those positions responsible for air defence and ‘justice’ not strike you as a mite suspicious?

    It is to be expected that Chilcot had nothing on the real incentive for the invasion, especially given two of its ‘distinguished’ members. Richard Ingram had them bang to rights in 2010.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/columnists/richard-ingrams/richard-ingramsrsquos-week-get-the-inquisitor-to-answer-a-few-questions-1883687.html

    It was Richard Perle and the Neocons who had an invasion of Iraq planned years before 9/11 and it is clear that it was principally their insistance that led to this crime against the people of Iraq. Libya and Syria are just the next two steps in the Neocon scheme to Balkanise the Middle East.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-07-01/short-history-neocon-clean-break-grand-design-regime-change-disasters-it-has-fostere

    Agree entirely re. the disgusting behaviour of the Blariites though.

    • Node

      9/11 was impossible without US government complicity.
      7/7 was the UK’s 9/11.
      Therefore suspicions of UK government complicity in 7/7 are reasonable.

      • pete fairhurst

        More than reasonable I think.

        Anyone who still thinks that 7/7 was perpetrated by 4 patsies from Leeds is well behind that particular curve. There are some dedicated sites, and some other respected alternative sites, that thoroughly debunk the official story.

        There is massive evidence, not least the “drills” that were taking place in the same locations of the same day. Always a sign of a false flag it seems.

        • MJ

          Drills, failure of CCTV and ID scattered conveniently at the scene are old favourites.

      • Anon1

        There is a special thread for 9/11 & 7/7 loons where you can discuss your various theories. Otherwise it is a banned topic.

        • charles drake

          anon1 talking of words being band?
          check out 7 7 the ripple effect on youtube the guy that made it was an ex trainspotter they keep a track on train times.
          anon1 is your name peter power?

      • Mick McNulty

        And the early reports of “gunmen” being shot at Canary Wharf which were quickly scrubbed from the news. It is believed the men realized they were being set up as patsies when the train from Luton didn’t arrive at Kings Cross in time, and they heard reports of bomb blasts. The reports of gunmen shot at Canary Wharf suggests they were seeking the sanctuary of the papers to inform them what was happening, but back then it wasn’t known just how criminally involved the media is with reporting these false flags.

    • Tony_0pmoc

      Canexpat,

      Don’t bring reality into it. It gives Craig a headache, and his Mum is not well, and nearly everyone will think you are a loonie.

      Things are bad enough as they are, without those suffering from cognitive dissonance realising that things are indeed very much worse.

      I agree the Saudi Elite are [email protected] too – but they didn’t have the motivation, access, imagination or technical skills to even plan 9/11, let alone pull it off.

      Hope you Mum’s getting better Craig.

      Tony

  • Peter Spencer

    good luck with your mum….even these brief notes are bang on target….an appalling “human”? being

  • Fredi

    Blair: “There were no lies, parliament and cabinet were not misled, there was no secret commitment to war. The intelligence was not falsified and the decision was made in good faith.”

  • David

    I agree totally with your comments. I really do hope that Blair Straw et al do have to face a trial at Law in the near future. If as they claim, they have acted properly at all times, then they’ll have nothing to fear. As Blair is a QC, it won’t cost him anything in defence fees either! I do also hope that those who made sacrifices to oppose the war in the first place will be given a prominent voice! I am not holding my breath. Evil seems to be ascendant right now.

    I hope all will be well with you mother.

    • michael norton

      The Blairs, The Kinnocks, The Straws,
      guess which side they were batting for?

      REMAIN

      says it all, snouts in the trough, fuck the little people.

    • bevin

      “As Blair is a QC, it won’t cost him anything in defence fees either! ”
      It will if he wants a competent defence. Luckily he can afford the best.

    • Habbabkuk

      David

      On a trial for Blair and Co, you write:

      “If as they claim, they have acted properly at all times, then they’ll have nothing to fear.”

      That’s what many advocates of greater surveillance powers for the internet and other modes of electronic communication by the intelligence services say, isn’t it?

      Good to see that sentiment on here, as represented by your good self, appears to be coming round to agreeing with that argument! 🙂

  • Anon1

    You cannot transplant Western democracy onto a collection of 7th Century tribes who adhere to a violent death-cult. It would have been better to have left the thug Saddam in charge as the only alternative to medieval religious fanaticism.

      • Anon1

        Nothing colonial about it, Martin. On the contrary, let them get on with it.

      • Clark

        “medieval religious fanaticism” called Saudi Wahhabism, which the US is treaty-bound to protect (see “Bitter Lake”), and which neocon US/UK elements routinely exploit and cooperate with (see Mujahideen, Al Nusra, Covenant of Security, etc.etc.)

    • Anon1

      I thought you said you would never comment here again after you had an anti-Semitic comment deleted?

      • Anon1

        Your only interest in the Janner case was that he was J**ish and a supporter of Israel. I recall you were almost boiling over with glee at the thought of sticking one to the J**s.

        I didn’t support Janner. If I did then you will be able to produce the evidence. I didn’t comment on Freud, but I suspect your motivation was the same.

      • Anon1

        “I said that to embarrass the mods for deleting what I wrote about a man you were defending.”

        Rubbish. You were deleted for being an anti-Semitic turd and you stomped off in a huff for being told what you are.

      • charles drake

        anon1
        what are your thoughts on tory blair’s privy council position.
        is it as strong today as last week.
        blairs 2 hour speech off the cuff drafted in 4 hours or 3 years.
        tory blair privy council bones man for life or soon over?

      • giyane

        Anon1 is allowed to be Islamophobic. Let me be specific: I have added 2 letters, B and C to his above comment to illustrate the point.

        “You cannot transplant Western democracy onto a collection of 7th Century BC tribes who adhere to a violent death-cult. It would have been better to have left the thug Netanyahoo in charge as the only alternative to medieval religious fanaticism.”

    • K Crosby

      What about the C21st death cults, the ones that have butchered 1.4 million Iraqis? The Middle Eastern head choppers who occupy Palestine and Arabia are footling amateurs by comparison.

    • hairyman

      Errr. Iraq was a pretty brutal dictatorship, but it was also a secular and modern country, prior to Gulf War 1 and the subsequent sanctions. If you had any interest in the political or social history of the middle east in the twentieth century you’d be cringing at the stupidity rest of your comment as well.

      I assume your phrase “violent death cult” refers to all flavours and branches of Islam, as practiced peacefully and, in most cases, constructively,by a significant chunk of the world’s population? I’m atheist myself and think all religions are a bit silly (but can be a help or comfort to their practitioners), but Islam is no more a “violent death cult” than Christianity is a “cannibal death cult”.

      You really do come across as an unpleasant person.

  • AAMVN

    I couldn’t watch Blair’s weasel-like performance on CNN. So what if he meant well – Hitler meant well…

    Blair is no fool and knows he will be remembered for his crimes long after his popularity has been forgotten. You can’t expect him to fess up. The man has no integrity. Few successful politicians do.

    I hope your mother’s condition improves.

    • Habbabkuk

      I understand what you’re getting at but it’s a bit of a stretch to say that Hitler meant well.

      (in saying that I suppose Lysias will turn up soon to quote yet another book he’s been reading and which demonstrates conclusively that Hitler did mean well) 🙂

      • George

        Strictly speaking, everyone means well. No-one – at least no-one who’s active – turns around and says to themselves, “Oh I’m so evil!”

  • Juliana Farha

    I’m glad you made the point about the broadcast media, Craig. Forget whether they are interviewing those who were against the war in the interest of ‘balance’. They shouldn’t be interviewing those who supported it now full stop. Chilcot took 7 years to consider the very points they are making and explicitly refuted them. Simply put, they lost their case. I see folks on Twitter saying Blair ought to be tried at the Hague. I’d be happy with a total media blackout of him and his appalling apologists and acolytes.

    Hope your mother is ok.

  • Anon1

    Thankfully it looks like the Blairite coup is petering out. I was starting to get a little worried.

    #KeepJezSafe

  • John Spencer-Davis

    Best wishes to you and your mother Craig, I hope she will be okay.

  • Tfs

    Yeah there just happened to be a terrorist drill going along at the time of the bombs, replicating the attacks on the trains there were actually bombed. Yeah right.

    And really, now you say the Saudi’s had a hand in 9/11, you conspiracy theorist.

    On 9/11 you really need to ask only one question. Does the flight profiles of the pilots on 9/11 equate to their ability?
    The answer in no, so they obviously had considerable training on like aircraft, and not just the couple of instances recorded. They were trained elsewhere in secret. They were trained by someone in their mother tongue, with materials in their mother tongue.

    The 9/11 investigation didn’t address this SMALL point.

  • charles drake

    never under estimate the power of lessons will be learned.
    butler lessonsbutler lessonsbutler lessons
    leveson lessons
    chilcot chill pill lessons
    12 books millions of words
    a war a peace x 5 of fine privy council port and stilton lessons.
    tory blair has had all privy council luncheon voucher chit credits removed.
    his world tour lecture fee has dropped from 250 thousand down to 180 thousand.
    time away on cliff richard and richard branson islands maybe a visit to mandy at jacob rothschild’s bunker on in under corfu.
    nobody expected the tough words from hard man mad frankie chilcot not the knock blow the peacniks where expecting but hard lessons to process and learn from.

    as for sas and mi6 in in libya and syriana and ukrania they must improve dollar input to bomb and bullet kill ratios.
    frank kitson and david sterling low level operations for oded yinon on and on

  • Tfs

    Sorry for the double post.

    On the subject of ‘crime of aggression ‘ whilst it may have been recognised by the ICC around 1998, I believe the term was not actually defined/ratified till much later.

    Possible legal loophole for Blair?

    Ignoring wmds Blair and Bush wanted Regime Change. Is this not illegal under international law?

    Finally, the UN has sided with Blair and Bush on the issue. They certainly have not imposed any sanctions on the countries

  • Leonard Young

    There will be growing disquiet towards Chilcot. I cannot be the only one who is disturbed by the implausible notion that his report’s tone is somehow festooned with excoriating views underneath the nicely-mannered civil servant restraint. I just don’t buy that. He has let a whole lot of criminals completely off the hook, and never used the word “lies” about WMD when it is palpable that the whole affair was peppered with them.

    Robert Fisk gets it right by pointing out that hardly a word of Chilcot’s report refers to the views, suffering or position of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. In fact none of them were even invited to give evidence:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/chilcot-inquiry-report-iraq-war-robert-fisk-tired-of-lessons-ignores-iraqis-a7124841.html

  • Node

    Blair will be protected from prosecution to re-assure other traitors that it is safe and profitable to betray your country to the puppet masters.

  • squirrel

    The intelligence ‘fell off the back of a lorry’. The defence of not checking with due dligence doesn’t work for those who fence stolen goods, why should it work for Blair

1 2 3 9

Comments are closed.