Iraq War Inquiry, Day 15, Breaks for 'Merry Christmas'

We lead off with the ending of the first part of the Chicot {British} Iraq War Inquiry, as we will shortly celebrate the day of the birth of the 'Prince of Peace' around the World, or at least that's the now myth I was taught all these years. Myth because apparently with the birth of Jesus as well as in other religious beliefs Religious Ideology is invoked and we ask to be protected and blessed by God as we all Blow Each Other Up when ever possible and when reasons can be fixed to engage our War Machines. For modern christians?, just like those of old, the religious ideology has been turned on it's head, Jesus son of God can't be a 'Prince of Peace' not to believers of who cheer on destructive Wars and Occupations of others, for any reason, as they raise the rhetoric of Intolerance, sounds exactly like the other major religious ideologies doesn't it, coming from the ones who are on the extremist fringes of them preaching their cherry picked religious quotes to justify their hate and intolerances, non religious, towards others they fear, so much for Peace!

A damning picture painted by the Chilcot inquiry

From politics to planning, the invasion of Iraq was a disastrous business

The mandarins have spoken. The first evidence-gathering session of the Chilcot inquiry into the disastrous Iraq war has come to an end after three weeks of testimony from senior civil servants, generals, diplomats, advisers and intelligence chiefs. Some of that testimony has been self-serving; an attempt to deflect blame for the shambles that occurred after the invasion. But valuable information has emerged too.

Snip

Of course we need to be sceptical of attempts by British generals and diplomats to pin the blame for the disastrous fate of the Iraq occupation on American stupidity, a line that handily absolves them of responsibility for the disaster that unfolded....>>>>>

In the above we find this sentence: "Predictions that this inquiry would yield nothing of any worth" which hasn't been the case especially if on this side of the pond and looking for the little pieces of the criminal intent puzzle, conspiracy among the players civilian and military who would give the orders for, War Crimes, never mentioned in a public forum and that fit well into what was thought and spoken by many starting before the invasion, and not only much has been proven since but none has been disproved, and over these years of the occupations of two countries not just Iraq.

Chilcot says Iraq war inquiry is not entertainment

Chairman responds to critics by says he was not out to 'ambush witnesses or score points'

The chairman of the Iraq inquiry today defended the way he has conducted the hearings, saying he was not out to "ambush witnesses or score points". He added: "We are not here to provide public sport or entertainment."

In a statement issued as he and his panel held the last session before a Christmas break, Sir John Chilcot also said he would seek the publication in the new year of highly classified documents during questioning of former and serving ministers, most notably Tony Blair....>>>>>

Waging War On The Brain: Psycho Neurological Consequences Of War

War is hell, as the old saying goes — with loss of life and limb, destruction of infrastructure and the environment, and devastating costs. Recent biomedical research has shed light on another pernicious consequence of military conflict: psychological and neurological conditions like post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury. At the same time, researchers have worked to uncover some of the motives and meanings of war.

The 89th Annual Meeting of the Association for Research in Nervous and Mental Disease (ARNMD), organized by the ARNMD in collaboration with New York-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center and held today at The Rockefeller University, examines the psychological and neurological aspects of war from a variety of perspectives — from the experience of a Marine colonel during wartime and a presentation on “the mind of the terrorist,” to a lecture on preventing mass violence given by Weill Cornell Medical College’s Dr. David A. Hamburg, a leading expert on genocide....>>>>>

The travails of the young war criminal

That may seem a bit harsh, for never has an alleged war criminal seemed more sincere, more open, even more innocent. As he said about his 2003 decision to involve Britain in the American invasion of Iraq in his resignation speech four years later: "Hand on heart, I did what I thought was right." But EVERYBODY does what they think is right.

They may mean pragmatically right, or morally right, or even ideologically right, but one way or another people will find ways to justify their actions to themselves: Even Pol Pot believed that his actions were justified. When people's choices lead to the deaths of others, they must eventually be judged by more objective criteria than mere sincerity. That is now happening to Tony Blair.

Snip

Yet the mere existence of the Chilcot inquiry has so shaken Blair that he has made an extraordinary admission. He admitted on December 13 that he would have invaded Iraq even if he had known at the time that the "intelligence" about weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq was wrong.

Now, I realize that you must be wondering why I am devoting all this space to a discredited ex-leader whose country once played a minor role in the invasion of a middle-sized Arab country. The war is mostly over now, the dead cannot be brought back to life, and we have lots of new things to worry about. The point is that there is a law, and they deliberately broke it. Since 1945, it has been a crime to invade another country: That was the main charge brought against the Nazi leaders at Nuremberg. The new rule was written into the United Nations Charter, principally at the behest of the U.S., and there are virtually no exceptions to it.

You have the right to defend yourself if another country attacks you, but you are not allowed to attack another country on the grounds that it has a wicked ruler, or follows policies you disapprove of, or even because you think it might attack you one of these days. No unilateral military action is permitted, and even joint action against a genuinely threatening country is only permissible with the authorization of the UN Security Council....>>>>>

That 'wicked ruler' was installed with our help and then supported for many years as he waged destruction on his own people as well as waged war on a neighbor! Those 'policies' held and practiced by that 'wicked ruler' were given a wink and a nod and excused as they were brought into the meme of helping our National Security!

More than six years later, what was the aim of invading Iraq?

Although Britain tried desperately to get some kind of authorization from the UN Security Council as a legal basis for armed action, its efforts to do so failed

Before the Iraq War was launched in March 2003 the world was given the impression by the US and Britain that the goal was to eradicate weapons of mass destruction.

Recent comments by former British prime minister Tony Blair suggest, however, that regime change was the essential aim. He would have thought it right to remove former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein even if he had known that there were no weapons of mass destruction (WMD), he said, but he would obviously have had to “deploy” different arguments.

Must we not conclude that the WMD arguments were “deployed” mainly as the best way of selling the war? Blair’s comments do not exclude a strong — but mistaken — belief in the existence of WMD even when the invasion was launched. However, given that hundreds of inspections had found no WMD and evidence had fallen apart, such a belief would have reflected a lack of critical thinking....>>>>>

Britain Under Bush: Chilcot Inquiry

In an early leading article on the Chilcot inquiry, the Guardian observed:

"What is already clear from the first week alone is that the decisions, secret or otherwise, that led to war were the product of systemic failure. Intelligence analysts, diplomats, in fact the entire machinery of the British government, proved supine against Washington's will. Under that pressure, almost everyone buckled." (Leading Article: Iraq inquiry: Dancing to American drums,' The Guardian, November 28, 2009)...>>>>>

Snip

Buckling Under Bush

Unfortunately, almost no-one had cared to study anything. Former chief UN weapons inspector, Scott Ritter, put the issue in perspective last month:

"As of December 1998, both the U.S. and Britain knew there was no 'smoking gun' in Iraq that could prove that Saddam's government was retaining or reconstituting a WMD capability. Nothing transpired between that time and when the decision was made in 2002 to invade Iraq that fundamentally altered that basic picture.

"But having decided on war using WMD as the justification, both the US and Great Britain began the process of fabricating a case after the fact. Lacking new intelligence data on Iraqi WMD, both nations resorted to either recycling old charges that had been disproved by UN inspectors in the past, or fabricating new charges that would not withstand even the most cursory of investigations."

He added:...>>>>>

Blair accused over WMD evidence

Tony Blair faced fresh accusations that he covered up evidence that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction before invading Iraq.

The father of a serviceman killed in the conflict alleged that the former prime minister used WMD as a "way in" to the war despite being told by former UN weapons inspector Hans Blix that the weapons did not exist.

Richard Green urged members of the Iraq Inquiry to look closely at how arguments about WMD were used in the run-up to the March 2003 invasion.

His son, Royal Navy Lieutenant Philip Green, 30, from Caythorpe, Lincolnshire, was one of seven personnel killed when two Sea King helicopters collided over the northern Arabian Gulf two days after the start of the war.

Speaking at a special session of the inquiry in central London for bereaved families, Mr Green said: "It is the weapons of mass destruction that this centres upon. I believe that Blair used this as a way in. He couldn't do it with regime change because that would not have been allowed."...>>>>>

Witnesses for the prosecution: how Blair is suffering trial by Chilcot

As the Iraq inquiry pauses for the Christmas break, Michael Savage reviews the growing evidence against the former PM

Yet, as its first four weeks of public hearings draws to a close, Sir John Chilcot's inquiry into the decision to invade Iraq has already exposed a string of failings within the British Government during the 70 hours of testimony given by the 38 witnesses that have appeared so far. One theme has emerged above all others.

"This time, in contrast to previous inquiries, where it becomes essential, they are prepared to leave Blair in the firing line,"

Snip

Though Mr Blair has been left exposed by his decision to back the US-led invasion, the early weeks of the inquiry have laid bare that both he and his Government were given precious little influence in return. Sir Christopher Meyer, the former ambassador in Washington, said Britain had gained almost nothing, save for the "applause factor" it garnered Mr Blair and British diplomats. "It is wonderful stuff being applauded wherever you go," he said. "I said to London, 'The key thing now, quite apart from Iraq, is to translate this popularity into real achievements'. We failed."

Snip

Five questions that Blair needs to answer

* When did he decide that he would back the US in any military action? Was it as early as his meeting with President Bush in April 2002?

* Does he accept that his foreword to the September 2002 dossier, which said that Saddam Hussein's possession of WMD was "beyond doubt", was overstated?

* Why did he appear to throw away the influence he had over President Bush as his main ally in the war?

* Why did he not delay the invasion after the warning from Maj Gen Tim Cross, two days before the invasion, that post-war planning wasn't ready?

* Did he receive any intelligence that contradicted his claims in the 2002 September dossier on Iraq's WMD? It's alleged that he did in March 2003...>>>>>

Former PM 'will give evidence in public'

Speaking at the end of the first session of public hearings, Sir John also said that "most witnesses" had been "open and candid". Sir John Scarlett, the former head of MI6, has been accused of being misleading over the reliability of intelligence on Iraq.

He attempted to quash speculation that Mr Blair would be allowed to give evidence behind closed doors. "Evidence will only be heard in private in the narrow circumstances we have set out in the protocols on our website," he said. "But I would like to be absolutely clear about this – evidence sessions with key decision-makers, including the former Prime Minister, will be in public."

The hearings will resume in the New Year, when Mr Blair, Geoff Hoon, former Defence Secretary, and Clare Short, former International Development Secretary, will appear....>>>>>

Sir John Chilcot's closing statement, 17 December 2009

The Inquiry has now completed its first four weeks of public hearings, examining 38 witnesses over 23 sessions. Since July we have received more than 40 thousand Government documents (more than 12,000 from No.10 alone); and have held two public seminars, six meetings with families and veterans with a further one tomorrow.

This is no more than the end of the beginning. We expect to hold five more weeks of public hearings in the New Year: a further week to complete the narrative, covering the period 2007 to 2009, and then four weeks in January and February with the most senior decision-makers. This will mark a new phase to this round of public hearings but in subject matter we will be returning to examine more closely many of the issues that have been raised in the past few weeks....>>>>>

Watch the Inquiry Live when in Session

Written Transcripts by Date

Oral: The Video's by Date

See how the Inquiry is unfolding on the Sky News Timeline

BBC Iraq inquiry - day by day timeline of evidence given

Merry Christmas to those who celebrate the Birth of The Prince of Peace, not of War, and Holiday Wishes to others who actually not only believe in but try to live their lives by the ideologies of their religious beliefs and not the fanaticism of extremist religious ideology under the recognized main religions on this planet, Peace and Tolerance to All!!

For You 'wacky!' 'fundy!' christian's?

Of the late 20th and now 21st century, under the politically correctness of the day and season of 'Merry Christmas', the Crucifixion thus the Cross Have Nothing To Do With The Celebration of the 'Birth' of Christ!!!

Iraq War Inquiry, Day Four

This Inquiry is confirming, though already done but not all by the spoken words of the participants, what went on especially behind the closed doors and placing it with what's already been into the public realm. No hiding in todays world, especially when the little notes come forward like a puzzles small pieces! It's easier to keep silent if nobodies asking any questions, but there are to many involved that when questions are asked, recorded into record and on film, it's the little parts of the answers that ring out.

Like it was really interesting the other day to find out that Iraq was forth on the Brits list of worry, Libya was first, and who's the United States new good buddy now, why Libya, as made so by the cheney/bush duo!! Then yesterday in the immediate hours of 9/11, while no one knew where the bush was, and the rest should have been really worried about the people of this Country, they represented, and monitoring the devastation that occurred coordinating with others as to the needs etc., Condi was already saying it was al Qaeda {she must have paid attention? to the Clinton people? and read the Intel reports?, maybe} but also started wondering if Saddam had anything to do with these hijackings and devestating plane crashes! She would have also known that the Intel had him as not a friend or allie of bin Laden nor al Qaeda!

These are the little pieces of the already known, and more will sure surface, that have been missing and not spoken even in other investigations. Others testifying will bring more forward into the light, though you can bet that Blair won't bring any when he testifies, or will he!

November 25, 2009
Iraq inquiry hears regime change claim
British Iraq inquiry hears Bush admin. discussed toppling Saddam two years before the 2003 Iraq invasion

U.S. followed own timetable on Iraq war: UK envoy

The United States followed its own military timetable for the 2003 invasion of Iraq rather than allowing diplomacy to run its full course, the former British ambassador to the United Nations said on Friday.

Jeremy Greenstock told a British inquiry into the Iraq war that he did not think that U.N. inspectors had been given enough time to search for weapons of mass destruction (WMD), cited as the reason for war, before the March 2003 invasion.

Snip

In an opening written statement, Greenstock said only U.S. President George W. Bush was in a position to "switch off" the planning ahead of the invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

"The U.S. and the UK had, well before then, decided that the threat from Iraq, which was genuinely perceived as including the potential threat of the use of WMD, could only be terminated either if Saddam Hussein conceded absolutely everything the resolutions demanded or if his regime fell."

"If this was to be achieved through a U.N. route, that had to happen on a U.S.-ordained timing," he added...>>>>>

Read this: "Greenstock said only U.S. President George W. Bush was in a position to "switch off" the planning" as meaning the cheney had to pull the strings!

November 27, 2009
Iraq inquiry: Blair deal on regime change?
UK former ambassador to Washington tells Iraq inquiry he was excluded from Blair and Bush talks in 2002

How to Spin the Spin, i.e. freshman propaganda, you be the judge:

Iraq war based on "questionable legitimacy," says former UN envoy

The 2003 invasion of Iraq was of 'questionable legitimacy' but the momentum for action from the US was 'much too strong' for Britain to counter, London's former ambassador to the United Nations
said Friday.

Jeremy Greenstock, Britain's representative at the UN discussions in the run-up to the war, said he had considered resigning over the failure of the US and Britain to win support for a second UN resolution that would have authorized military action.

Snip

'I regard our participation in the military action in Iraq in March 2003 as legal but of questionable legitimacy in that it did not have the democratically observable backing of the great majority of member states, or even perhaps of the majority of people inside the UK,' he said.

'If you do something internationally that the majority of UN member states think is wrong, illegitimate or politically unjustifiable, you are taking a risk in my view,' said Greenstock...>>>>>

Invasion lacked legitimacy, Sir Jeremy Greenstock tells Chilcot inquiry

The invasion of Iraq was of “questionable legitimacy” because of the lack of international and public support, Britain’s Ambassador to the United Nations at the time told the official inquiry into the war yesterday.



Sir Jeremy Greenstock threatened to resign if Tony Blair gave in to American pressure and agreed to an invasion before a new UN resolution on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction was obtained. The former diplomat was kept in the dark over a change in policy when Mr Blair agreed with President Bush to seek the overthrow of Saddam Hussein a year before the invasion....>>>>>

Pay attention spineless america a scathing call for Reality, Indictments of the Guilty:

Why I believe Blair should stand trial - and even face charges for war crimes, by General Sir Michael Rose

Without blame: The Chilcot Inquiry will not hold leaders to account

The inquiry into the Iraq War is not a court and no one is on trial. So said Sir John Chilcot, chairman of the inquiry, in his opening statement. He added that he was not there to determine the guilt or innocence of those responsible for the invasion of Iraq.

The object of the inquiry is simply to identify the lessons that should be learned from Iraq in order to help future UK governments who may face similar situations.

Snip

But although these are worthy objectives, they fall scandalously short of the crucial issue which millions of people in this country - myself included - believe this inquiry should be about.

With respect to Sir John, there is really no point in holding a further inquiry unless it does apportion blame, unless it does hold to account those who led us into this unnecessary, unwinnable and costly war in Iraq.

The inquiry should be the first step in a judicial process that brings those responsible for the disasters of the Iraq war before the courts - and could, as I shall explain, ultimately result in Tony Blair being indicted for war crimes.....Read the Rest of what General Sir Michael Rose writes

General Sir Michael Rose was commander of UN peacekeeping forces in Bosnia. He is shortly to appear as a witness in the Karadzic war crimes trial in The Hague.

The World Waits, but more Importantly the Iraqi People Deserve Their Day in Court, at the very least, and the Accountability:

Iraqis' stories must be heard

Four years ago, I traveled to Iraq to talk with its besieged people. Chilcot cannot ignore them now

Four years ago this week I was kidnapped in Baghdad. My trip to Iraq had been motivated by frustration at the government's deafness to all voices of reasoned opposition to the war in Iraq. I went to meet Iraqis to reassure them that most people in Britain did not regard them as enemies. Today, the lead-up to that war is back in the spotlight with the Chilcot inquiry. This is more than just an academic exercise to many. Anyone – in Britain, Iraq or elsewhere – who had a relative killed in the conflict will feel an intense personal need to discover the truth. They will be listening to testimony that appears to gravely undermine the official justification for going to war. They will want to learn the reaction by the then government to the advice of Middle East diplomats who knew about the conflicts within Iraqi society, conflicts that Saddam had suppressed but were always likely to explode on his removal. If you are going to war, ignorance of the probable effects on the country in the aftermath is inexcusable. Why else do you have a large diplomatic and intelligence force in the area?...>>>>>

Who decides if a war is legal?

In a careful performance at the Iraq inquiry Sir Jeremy Greenstock claimed to have been ill-informed, not naive

Sir Jeremy Greenstock's questioning of the legitimacy – as opposed to the legality – of the Iraq war raises two pretty big questions of politics and international and law. Who decides if a war is legitimate? Who decides if it's legal? Are these just matters of opinion, to be determined ultimately by whoever has the most power, ie the US? In the case of Iraq, it's clear that Tony Blair subcontracted the decision to George Bush in early 2002.

Appearing at the Iraq inquiry this morning, Greenstock was less overtly critical of government policy than Sir Christopher Meyer was but both seem to have come to the same conclusion – that the diplomatic process was undermined by the military timetable and the commitment that Blair had given Bush that Britain would back regime change if it came to it....>>>>

Chilcot's Iraq war inquiry off to promising start

Sir John Chilcot and his team have started as they mean to continue

The sceptics might say the Iraq inquiry, chaired by Sir John Chilcot, is another pointless investigation, a colossal waste of time, and likely to be a whitewash.

But in the first week, some fascinating evidence has already emerged from these public hearings into the background to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

It is perhaps too early to say if it will be a definitive account of the war. But for those predicting some sort of cover-up, the initial signs suggest otherwise....>>>>>

Iraq Inquiry Digest Everything about the Chilcot Inquiry in one place

Day Four, Iraq Inquiry Minute-by-minute coverage of today's session of Sir John Chilcot's investigation into the Iraq war, which is hearing evidence from Sir Jeremy Greenstock

Baghdad Garden Becomes Graveyard, Full of Grieving

An Iraqi woman at the grave of a relative behind Baghdad's Abu Hanifa mosque, the most hallowed place of worship for Sunnis in Iraq.

BAGHDAD — In the gardens of the living and the dead, the war goes on; not so much with enthusiasm as with resignation.

Snip

Thousands of mourners throng the headstones in what only three years ago was a community garden on the banks of the Tigris River. This is a relatively new tradition in Iraq, paying respects to the dead between morning prayers and the feast held later in the day. On this one day, the garden of the dead overflows with the living.

Snip

Now this garden, known as the Martyrs of Adhamiya since it became a cemetery in 2007, is so densely packed with graves that it is often difficult to walk between the rectangular capstones that cover each one (out of reverence, no one dares tread on top). Six months ago, the authorities counted 9,000 graves, but many more have been added since. Nearly all are victims of Iraqi-on-Iraqi violence of one sort or another — terroristic bombings, sectarian killings, political assassinations...>>>>>

The Pandora's box, of an innocent country and people, we not only opened but totally destroyed that will take decades to be rebuilt, if ever!

Scott Ritter: The truth of UK's guilt over Iraq

Until Chilcot hears UN weapons inspectors' testimony, the fiction of Britain honestly seeking a WMD smoking gun prevails

With its troops no longer engaged in military operations inside Iraq, Great Britain has been liberated politically to conduct a postmortem of that conflict, including the sensitive issue of the primary justification used by then Prime Minister Tony Blair for going to war, namely Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, or WMD.

The failure to find any WMD in Iraq following the March 2003 invasion and subsequent occupation of that country by US and British troops continues to haunt those who were involved in making the decision for war. The issue of Iraqi WMD, and the role it played in influencing the decision for war, is at the centre of the ongoing Iraq war inquiry being conducted by Sir John Chilcot....>>>>>

Iraq War Inquiry, Day Three

On Sept 11 2001 Condi Rice, within hours of the devestation, was already sure al Qaeda did the hijackings and attacks but was also Already Mentioning Iraq as being Involved, or hoping so! To me I keep seeing a picture forming that they weren't interested At All in seeking out bin Laden nor even al Qaeda members, but Were Hell Bent On Regime Change In Iraq, which was already being discussed and pushed prior to Sept 11 2001. They had no concern for seeking out those who were a part of this extremely destructive criminal act against our Nation and it's Citizens, nor seemingly concern or thought as to the victims of the three extremely destructive acts, Saddam was on their minds!!

Iraq inquiry hears about Blair shift on regime change

George W. Bush and Tony Blair appeared to have "converged" on regime change in Iraq after talks at the U.S. president's Texas ranch in April 2002, a former British ambassador to Washington said on Thursday.

Snip

"I know what the Cabinet Office says were the results of the meeting but to this day I am not entirely clear what degree of convergence was, if you like, signed in blood at the Crawford ranch," Meyer told a British inquiry into the Iraq war.

Snip

"There are clues in the speech that Tony Blair gave the next day ... To the best of my knowledge, I may be wrong, this was the first time that Tony Blair had said in public 'regime change'," Meyer said.

"What he was trying to do was to draw the lessons of 9/11 and apply them to the situation in Iraq which led -- I think not inadvertently but deliberately -- to a conflation of the threat posed by Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein."

Snip

Meyer said that on Sept. 11, 2001, he spoke to Condoleezza Rice, then Bush's national security adviser, who said there was no doubt the attack on America was an al Qaeda operation and agencies were looking into possible connections with Iraq.

Snip

The former ambassador said that the "unforgiving nature" of the military timetable for an invasion of Iraq in 2003 did not give time for U.N. weapons inspectors led by Hans Blix to do their job in Iraq.

"It was impossible to see how Blix could bring the inspection process to a conclusion, for better or worse, by March," Meyer said.

"... you had to short-circuit the inspection process by finding the notorious smoking gun ... We found ourselves scrabbling for the smoking gun, which was another way of saying 'it's not that Saddam has to prove that he's innocent, we've now bloody well got to try and prove that he's guilty.'"

"And we -- the Americans, the British -- have never really recovered from that because of course there was no smoking gun."..>>>>>

From "The American Conservative":

Britain’s Iraq Inquiry

We are only two days in, and already we have “learned” that (for the benefit of the American market) there was no link to 9/11, that there were no WMD, and that Saddam Hussein would have been toppled by an internal coup anyway.

Snip

And why doesn’t everyone on the British Right who admires the American neoconservatives ask what it is about them that makes them so attractive to Tony Blair, of all people? If he loves them so much, then why do they? Likewise, to the Bush supporters now accruing to Palin, do some digging into Blair’s domestic record. If Bush loved Blair so much, then why did and why do you love Bush?...>>>>>

Reporter's Podcast: Britain Launches Iraq War Inquiry

A British inquiry opened this week looking into the country's participation in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Paul Davies of Independent Television News describes testimony that the Bush Administration mentioned Iraq on the day of the 9/11 attacks...>>>>>

Iraq inquiry's game-changing evidence

Sir Christopher Meyer's evidence has surely made it impossible to claim that Iraq was about WMD and not regime change

Snip

At the Iraq inquiry this morning, Sir Christopher Meyer has let so many cats out of the bag that it is hard to keep up with them all. He has confirmed that by the time Tony Blair met George Bush at Crawford, Texas in April 2002, Blair had already agreed to regime change. Meyer and others had told the US administration about this change of heart in March 2002. The "UN route" was a way to justify the war but the inspectors were never given the chance to do their job.

Or did we know all that already? Ever since the war, there has been a massive gulf between what various leaked documents have shown and the official version. Previous inquiries have failed to close that gap. Now Meyer, who was the UK ambassador to Washington at the time, has done exactly that.

Snip

Meyer said that the plan initially worked perfectly, with the passing in November 2002 of UN security council resolution 1441, which put the emphasis on Saddam Hussein. The US hoped that it would provide a tripwire to justify war but it did not. As we know now, there were no WMD.

This turned 1441 on its head. The military timetable, with war slated for March 2003, did not allow the inspections to work. There was a desperate scrabble for a smoking gun and attention turned to claims of Iraqi non-co-operation. Unfortunately, in March 2003, Hans Blix reported increased co-operation.

Snip

It looks as if Sir John Chilcot was right – in Meyer's case – to expect candour, given the mountain of evidence that the inquiry has. Meyer made clear that he was aware of these papers, none of which have yet been officially published. Unfortunately, Meyer said that many of his dispatches, warning of problems to come, are missing from the inquiry's otherwise excellent archive, which is of course dependent on disclosure by the government.

It looks as if the cover-up is continuing, but being botched this time....>>>>>

Christopher Meyer at Iraq war inquiry: Minute-by-minute coverage of Sir John Chilcot's investigation into the war in Iraq

The Downing Street Documents

Text of the Christopher Meyer Letter - March 18, 2002 memo from Christopher Meyer (UK ambassador to the US) to David Manning (UK Foreign Policy Advisor) recounting Meyer’s meeting with Paul Wolfowitz (US Deputy Secretary of Defense).

Sky News: Iraq Inquiry - Day 3

There was intrigue today from the moment it began - or didn't. Sir Christopher Meyer was late for his appearance delaying the start for some 40 minutes. He stated that it was for "reasons almost out of my control." Almost? What could he mean? He didn't elaborate.

"That George Bush was Calling the Shots"


Anyway - he got straight into a fascinating account of his time as the UK's man in Washington. And he didn't disappoint.

His task was to explain the relationship between Bush and Blair, how that relationship developed and how the stance of both America and the UK changed towards Iraq between 2001 and the invasion in March 2003...>>>>>

Iraq inquiry: stand up and be tweeted

After day three of the Iraq war inquiry, a picture is emerging of America's determination to invade - and the details are getting the Twittersphere spinning.

He is famous for being the man sent to Washington to "get up the arse of the White House and stay there".

But now Sir Christopher Meyer has told the Iraq war inquiry "there was a large chunk of time" in which no adviser was present as Tony Blair and George W Bush discussed the grounds on which to invade Iraq...>>>>>

It was all about Blair

The evidence on Iraq is now clear. The former PM was dizzied by Bush, and misled gullible MPs

The limitations of the Chilcot inquiry are obvious. It is a group of establishment trusties, evidence will not be on oath and the government is doing its best to keep key documents from the inquiry. Even yesterday, in the very first week of the inquiry, former British ambassador to Washington, Sir Christopher Meyer, mentioned four key documents that he knew existed but the Chilcot inquiry had not seen.

But despite everything, the truth is coming to light. One key revelation from Meyer's evidence is that Washington decided they wanted to invade Iraq and then scrabbled around for supporting evidence. As he put it: "The real problem, which I did draw several times to the attention of London, was that the contingency military timetable had been decided before the UN inspectors went in under Hans Blix." In other words, the inspections were a charade. The Americans were never much interested in the results. They had made up their minds...>>>>>

Chilcot inquiry: Tony Blair decided on Iraq war a year before invasion - envoy

Chilcot inquiry: Tony Blair's government never considered opting out or opposing George Bush's plan to invade Iraq. Photograph: Luke Frazza/EPA

Tony Blair's government decided up to a year before the Iraq invasion that it was "a complete waste of time" to resist the US drive to oust Saddam Hussein, opting instead to offer advice on how it should be done, the former British ambassador to Washington said today.

Sir Christopher Meyer, testifying to the Chilcot inquiry into Britain's role in the war, made it clear that once the Bush administration decided to take military action, the Blair government never considered opting out or opposing it...>>>>>

Britain 'had to prove Saddam was guilty'

The US had wanted to depose Saddam Hussein for years before the invasion, the war inquiry has heard. (AFP)

The Iraq war inquiry in London has been told that the United States' insistence on going to war left Britain scrabbling for evidence of dangerous weapons to justify the invasion.

The former British ambassador to the United States, Sir Christopher Meyer, has been giving evidence on the third day of hearings.

Sir Christopher arrived in Washington in 1997 and held his role as chief conduit between London and Washington until 2003.

He told the inquiry that regime change in Iraq was US policy under the Democrats led by Bill Clinton.

He recalled conversations with the former US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz during which the overthrow of Saddam Hussein was first mentioned...>>>>>

They may be still trying to coverup some of what was going on, as mentioned earlier about talk of regime change long before 9/11, but with these pieces of information being spoken that coverup will fall apart rather rapidly, too many heads were in the game of criminality of the coming terror to be wrought on the Iraqi people and continuing on the Afghans as the drums beat away from al Qaeda and bin Laden!!

Iraq Inquiry Digest Everything about the Chilcot Inquiry in one place

Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war Follow the action as inquiry into one of the most contentious decisions of modern times begins hearing evidence

Atomic Aftermath: Atomic Veterans

Desert Rock, Nev: Atomic Bomb Testing

Betty Gaskin wishes she could hug her husband, Doctor, more often. She can’t.
“I wish I could hug him, but when I do I leave handprints on his back,’’ she said. “It’s been that way for a long time — ever since he was exposed to the atomic bomb tests at Desert Rock, Nev.’’

Doctor and Betty Gaskin tell the story of Doc's time in Nevada as an Army cook, being exposed to atomic energy, and a lifetime of pains they say were caused by radiation. Hosted by Wally Kennedy.......More Here w/related Links

Nuclear Blast Damage

Depleted Uranium: i.e Gulf War Syndrome?

GULF WAR ILLNESS CONSPIRACY TEST RESULTS IN POSITIVE

DU(depleted Uranium) has deadly after affects.Open your eyes and say NO to war.

DEPLETED URANIUM IN THE HUMAN BODY: Sr Rosalie Bertell, PhD

Epidemiologist Rosalie Bertell (PhD, biometrics)explains the effects of the weaponized DU on the people of Iraq and the planet. In subsequent parts of this series, Dr. Bertell offers readily-accessible ways to detox some heavy metals and poisons from the body.

Legacy of Wars............

Special Initiative on Agent Orange/Dioxin

Backround
From 1961 to 1971, U.S. military forces sprayed more than 20 million gallons of Agent Orange and other herbicides on forests and crops in southern and central Vietnam. The campaign had both human and environmental consequences. The immediate effect was to defoliate and destroy vegetation over wide areas. The delayed impact came from dioxin, a highly toxic chemical in Agent Orange that is critically harmful to humans................

Above comes from an embedded link in an article found at Mother Jones Agent Orange: Treatment For Vets Still Lagging, Says Report

The Ford Foundation will release a report Tuesday calling for continued study of the environmental and health effects of Agent Orange, as well as for stepped-up diagnosis and treatment of US veterans exposed to it. Used as a defoliant in Vietnam to destroy vegetation used as food and cover for the Viet Cong, the dioixn--named for the orange stripe on its label--has been the subject of controversy ever since its first use in 1962. Over the ensuing ten years of hard combat, some 20 million gallons of Agent Orange and other toxic herbicides were sprayed over six million acres of Vietnamese jungle. (See the box below for a selection of Mother Jones' earlier coverage of Agent Orange and the federal government's history of inadequate response to veterans' complaints.).............the rest found here

With linkbacks to a couple of previous articles on our subject of 'Agent Orange' and the other Defoliants used than.

Back to the Ford Foundation site link at the top you'll find the video above along with links to their strategy and those partnering with them, the members of the U.S.-Vietnam Dialogue Group, and finally the grant program totals so far and more.

I've done a few posts on Agent Orange and Defoliants from the occupation many many many of us served in, one just recently. All of them, in these last couple of years of renewed discussion by just a few, lead to this site Vietnam Agent Orange Relief & Responsibility Campaign - VAORRC and were posted leading up to and following a Vietnamese delagation that traveled to the U.S. on their court case against the United States and the Chemical manufacturing companies, loosing again. But we did have abit of good news just recently, US Doubles Funds for Agent Orange Cleanup, it's a drop in the bucket of what we owe to those who've suffered all these years since, as well as those of our brothers, many now gone from the results of their contamination and suffering!

Wars Don't End, what is done, especially in these Wars of Choice that become more of testing grounds for the billions of dollars spent on extremely high priced weapons of mass destruction, is leaving behind for those that fight them and especially those that live in these occupied countries lifetime suffering, some of that carried into further generations!

We've now had, since Vietnam, Gulf War Syndrome still not resolved as those exposed are suffering from a variety of ailments, many having died already, and births of their children with physical problems!

There are many questions about our use of Depleted Uranium, nuking others, in our artillery and use in the vehicle armor. We have some soldiers returning that are now suffering ailments. some devastating and life threatening, from possible exposure to a whole host of chemicals and contaminants from the burn pits at bases in Iraq and Afghanistan.

These aren't the only problems of aftermath of these occupation, there's land mines, cluster bombs that didn't explode, and a whole host of other dangers right along with the trauma that's been caused!

Tens of thousands are killed, they don't suffer the after! Do you think those that survive will forget, or how about the young and those newborn during that grew up these years, that's all they know!

Wars Don't End!!

Another Loooong Battle Getting Attention/Action

Kudo's Barrack, Kudo's, But Much More Still Needed!

US Doubles Funds for Agent Orange Cleanup

HANOI, Vietnam (AP) — The United States government has doubled its funding for dealing with the environmental and health consequences of its wartime use in Vietnam of the toxic herbicide Agent Orange, the embassy said Friday.

President Barack Obama recently signed a bill increasing the funding from $3 million to $6 million, embassy officials said. Most of the money is being used in Danang, where U.S. troops used to mix and store Agent Orange at an Air Force base before loading it onto planes.

More Of The Change We Can Believe In!!

Many U.S. soldiers, my brothers of the Vietnam War, have been not only trying to help the Vietnamese in their struggle with this countries poisoning of their lands but have opened up and support places like Vietnam Friendship Village, as well as care facilities and orphanages for those still being born and have since we left.

Vietnam believes as many as 4 million people have suffered serious health problems from the herbicide, such as cancer, spina bifida and other birth defects. The U.S. says the actual number is probably far lower and that further scientific study is needed to understand the health impact. The U.S. and Vietnam only began working together in 2007 to address the consequences of Agent Orange after years of disagreement.

The embassy said in a statement that one third of the $6 million is being used for health programs to serve people in the Danang area. The rest will be used to remove dioxin from the soil and sediment near Danang airport.

Much more is needed especially if we're not going to compensate the families of the victims, as noted with this:

Friday's People's Army newspaper quoted Lai Minh Hien, a Vietnamese environmental official in charge of Agent Orange issues, as saying that Vietnam needs additional 1 trillion dong ($57 million) to clean up dioxin in Danang as well as at former U.S. air bases in Bien Hoa and Phu Cat.

Agent Orange devastates generations of Vietnamese


Justice for Victims of Agent Orange


Vietnam Agent Orange Relief & Responsibility Campaign - VAORRC

Brother Dave Cline has widened his smile some, my guess is, and he still watches over the Vietnamese people we fought but he fell in love with, and they him, and worked tirelessly to help, Rip Brother RIP, your work is hopefully finally paying off!

Justice for Vietnamese Agent Orange Victims: 2008

Again this year Vietnamesse Agent Orange victims are touring the United States seeking justice, Our Responsibility, for the long term damage done to their countries citizens from our occupation of their country not so long ago.


Delegation of Vietnamese Women Agent Orange Victims Visit 10 US Cities, Sept 28–Oct 31, 2008


Co-sponsors: Veterans For Peace, Vietnam Veterans Against the War, National Lawyers Guild & United For Peace & Justice





Organizing groups for the delegation have formed & are planning events in 9/28 - 10/5:


New York City, New Jersey & New Haven, Welcoming reception (9/30), meeting with lawyers (10/1), Columbia U Law School (10/2), Dominican community (10/3 at 2005 Amsterdam Ave. 7pm), public event at Musician's Union Local 803, 322 West 48th St. Manhattan (10/04 6:30pm), churches, contact us


10/6 - 10/8: Washington DC, press conference at the Supreme Court, meetings with Congress representatives, contact us


10/9 - 10/12: Birmingham AL, meetings with lawyers, contact us


10/12 - 10/14: Pittsburgh PA, Reconciliation & Healing: Remembering Vietnam, La Roche College, contact us


10/15 - 10/18: Detroit MI, National Lawyers Guild, Law for the People Convention, Friday 10/17


10/19 - 10/21: Chicago IL, NPR Worldview, Roosevelt University, Hull House, U of Illinois at Chicago


10/22 - 10/25: Portland & Eugene OR, 10/22 Knight Law School, 7pm (Eugene).


10/26 - 10/28: Los Angeles CA, Reception by CHEER, UCLA Labor Center, Strategy Center & SoCA for Youth, contact us


10/28 - 10/31: Bay Area CA, events in Laney College, Eastside Arts Alliance (Oakland, 10/28), Glasner Center (Santa Rosa, 10/29), and at Veterans Building (San Francisco, 10/30 7pm), contact us


The Delegation: Both women are Agent Orange victims.

Ms. TRẦN THỊ HOAN (age 21), was born on December 16, 1986 in Đức Linh district of Bình Thuận province in Central Vietnam. She is a second generation victim of Agent Orange. Her mother was exposed to Agent Orange as a result of the war. She was born without two legs and one hand is seriously atrophied.

From the time she was12 years old, Hoan has lived in Peace Village II, the Agent Orange center at Từ Dũ Hospital, Ho Chi Minh City.
Hoan is now a college student in computer science in Ho Chi Minh City and is fluent in English. This is her first visit to the U.S. See video with Hoan.

Mrs. ĐẶNG HỒNG NHỰT was born on December 12, 1936, married in 1959 and gave birth to a healthy son in 1960.
Between 1961 and 1966 she joined the resistance forces in the Southeastern region of Vietnam (included Tây Ninh, Bình Dương, Củ Chi), which was heavily sprayed with Agent Orange. She was directly exposed to Agent Orange and suffered from skin rashes and diarrhea. Between 1966 and 1972 she was arrested and imprisoned by the US-supported government.
In 1973 and again in 1975 Ms. Nhut suffered miscarriages early in her pregnancy. In 1975, she again suffered a miscarriage. In 1977, she gave birth to a congenitally deformed still-born child. In 1980, she had another miscarriage. In 2002, she had surgery to remove an intestinal tumor. In 2003, she underwent another operation to remove a tumor from her thyroid. She now has cancer.

Ms. Nhut’s husband was a resistance fighter in the same region between 1960 and 1975 and was also exposed to Agent Orange. He was later diagnosed with intestinal cancer, metastasizing to the lung and the liver. He died in May, 1999. Vietnamese Struggle with Agent Orange

Lastly, Ms. ĐINH THỊ MINH HUYỀN is accompanying as an Interpreter. Ms. Huyen is from the Vietnam Peace & Development Foundation and Vietnam Association for Protection of Children’s Rights.

Visit Vietnam Agent Orange Relief & Responsibility Campaign site to find out much more and to help if you feel there is a responsibility we should embrace for our actions as a society and country against others, especially those that have done nothing to us!


Last year I did a few posts about their Visit to the United States seeking Justice for what we had done during our occupation of their country in the Courts here as to the use of Defoliants {WMD's} especially Agent Orange which still poisons their country. You can visit Here, as well as Here and Here and finally Here.


In that last link I have a Video I put together of a song, written by a Vietnamesse Artist, about Defoliants in Vietnam, and was Linked to for Worldwide listening connected to the Agent Orange Justice Movement, this is that Video:

Plame-What Was Scrubbed by 60min-Iran

Former Covert Agent Speaks

Click To Play

When Valerie Plame Wilson's identity was leaked, the covert CIA agent became the center of a scandal that went all the way to the White House. Katie Couric previews her exclusive interview.

Nukin the U.S.?

Was this cheneys One Bomb?

David Addington,Dick Cheney's legal alter ego

“We’re one bomb away from getting rid of that obnoxious [FISA] court,” Goldsmith recalls Addington telling him in February 2004.

Niger To Sue U.S. - Over 2 Billion

NGOs to sue US over WMD claims
From correspondents in Niamey
January 14, 2007

SOME 30 non-governmental organisations in Niger said overnight they are going to sue the United States for nearly two billion dollars for "unfairly accusing" Niger of selling uranium to the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.
"Our lawyers are about to file a lawsuit against the US calling for damages of about 1000 billion CFA francs ($2.42 billion dollars) for the harm suffered" by the country, Moustapha Kadi, president of the Collective of organisations in Niger defending the right to energy (CODDAE).
The lawsuit by the collective will be filed at either French or Belgian courts, Kadi added.
In January 2003, US President George W. Bush accused Saddam of having bought uranium from Niger to make weapons of mass destruction.
The Niger collective said in a statement that investigations by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), world media and US officials, all concluded that it was a "false accusation" against Niger.
That false information was used by Bush "to invade Iraq," said the collective's statement, which also called for support from Niger's President Mamadou Tandja, who back in 2003 said the US allegations were "harming Niger's image".
Niger is the world's third-largest producer of uranium with about nine percent of the global market, according to 2003 figures.
The country's two uranium deposits have been mined for 40 years by the French group Areva, number one in civil nuclear energy.