Tony Bliar recalled to the Chilcot inquiry

Spread the love

Tony – the apostate to Israel – Bliar is to reappear before the Chilcot Inquiry later today to clarify some issues arising from his former testimony. In the past, on this blog I have satirised the Chilcot Inquiry as the inquiry pretending to investigate the Iraq war. I am pleased that at least the inquiry is pretending not to pretend to investigate the Iraq war.

In all things related to Tony “I’m a pretty straight kinda guy” Bliar we have more pretending. We have pretending that the conversations between Blair and Dubya Bush are something other than they actually were.

The questions facing Tony Blair at tomorrow’s Iraq inquiry hearing are piling up. It emerged last night that parts of Mr Blair’s conversations with the United States President George Bush in the build-up to war were expunged from Whitehall records.

Sir John Chilcot’s team also heard yesterday from a senior civil servant that Downing Street ignored Foreign Office warnings over publishing the infamously exaggerated dossiers on the threat from Saddam Hussein’s supposed weapons arsenal.

Mr Blair’s private secretary at No 10 routinely deleted any mention of his correspondence with Mr Bush from the Government minutes, the inquiry has found out. The disclosure will fuel anger over the failure to release the memos between the two leaders in the run-up to war, which could fill in gaps for when Mr Blair took key decisions over the war. David Cameron, challenged over the refusal to publish the memos, said that he was powerless to order their release.

Mr Blair’s then private secretary, Matthew Rycroft, has recalled that Mr Bush often began telephones calls or video conferences in 2002 and 2003 by thanking the former prime minister for his letters.

Mr Rycroft said that he drew up two accounts of the conversations, omitting any reference to them in the Whitehall record because Mr Blair viewed them as “personal dialogue”. He told the inquiry: “I do recall doing it on a number of occasions. I would have thought possibly about five occasions and each time for a particular reason.

“I recall the choice I had was either only doing an expurgated version or doing two versions, and so on these occasions I decided it was better to do two versions.” Mr Rycroft said Mr Blair had always been clear that Britain would support US military action.
[independent article continues]

Furthermore, the head of the UK Civil Service has refused to publish correspondence between Tony Bliar and Dubya Bush.

I’ve quoted this article fully because it is impotant.

The head of the civil service has refused to allow the official inquiry into the Iraq War to publish notes sent by Tony Blair to former US president George Bush.

Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O’Donnell denied requests for exchanges between the former prime minister and Mr Bush about Iraq to be declassified and released.

Inquiry chairman Sir John Chilcot said: “The inquiry is disappointed that the Cabinet Secretary was not willing to accede to its request.

“This means that in a narrow but important area the inquiry may not always be able to publish as fully as it would wish the evidential basis for some of its comments and conclusions.”

Sir John wrote to Sir Gus last month asking him to authorise the declassification of extracts from notes sent by Mr Blair to Mr Bush and records of discussions between the two leaders.

He highlighted the fact that Mr Bush and Mr Blair – as well as the former prime minister’s chief of staff Jonathan Powell and communications chief Alastair Campbell – had revealed details of some of their talks in their recent memoirs, and said the inquiry’s protocol on releasing documents supported disclosure.

Sir John said in his letter: “The inquiry regards it essential in order to fulfil its terms of reference, to be able to chronicle the sequencing of discussions on Iraq between the UK prime minister and the president of the United States.

“It seems to us that it is both contrary to the terms of the protocol and, in light of the disclosures in recent memoirs, unnecessary to prevent the inquiry from being able to do this.”

He added: “In the inquiry’s view it is essential, if it is to produce a reliable account, that it is able to quote extracts from the records of what the prime minister said to president Bush in their discussions on Iraq.”

Sir Gus replied just before Christmas, writing: “My view is that the public interest is not best served by their release.

“I judge that their release would, or would be likely to, damage the UK’s international relations.”

He said the Cabinet Office attached “particular importance” to protecting the channel of communications between the British prime minister and the US president.

In a further letter to the Cabinet Secretary, Sir John said Mr Blair would face firm questioning about the content of his discussions with Mr Bush when he gives evidence to the inquiry for a second time on Friday.

He wrote: “Given Mr Blair’s decision to disclose some of the content in (his memoirs) A Journey, the committee is likely to be disappointed if he is less forthcoming in his evidence to us.

“This approach is also likely to increase the length of the hearing.”

Sir John added in a third letter to Sir Gus that the question of when and how Mr Blair made commitments to the US about Britain’s involvement in military action against Iraq was “central” to the inquiry’s considerations.

The inquiry chairman also revealed today that the committee recently took evidence in a closed session from David Pepper, the former head of the UK’s signals intelligence agency GCHQ.

A Cabinet Office spokeswoman said: “All HMG (HM Government) documents have been made available to the inquiry.

“The issue is one of publication. Exchanges between the UK prime minister and the US president are particularly privileged channels of communication.

“The Cabinet Secretary is of the firm view that the public interest in publishing these letters is not outweighed by the harm to the UK’s international relations that would likely be caused by his authorising their disclosure.

“This is in line with the published protocol.

“The majority of the inquiry’s declassification requests have been met. But there are important public interest principles at stake. These are recognised in the protocol.”

David Cameron was not consulted over whether to authorise publication of the documents, according to the Prime Minister’s spokesman.

The Cabinet Secretary took the decision in line with a protocol set out at the beginning of the inquiry, he added.

“(Mr Cameron) had no role in that process,” the spokesman said. “There is a protocol. That protocol sets out that in particular circumstances the Cabinet Secretary will make these judgments.”

Long-standing procedures also prevented serving ministers from seeing documents relating to the work of previous administrations, he said.

Asked whether the Prime Minister was minded to change the protocol so that the documents could be published, the spokesman replied: “No.”

Comment by L.G.K. Bufu the Max (a former title of the author of this article circa 1998 – 2000). Gus O’Donnell appears to be a civil servant i.e. subservient to the authority of government. If he is a civil servant – which he obviousl is – he answers to government and does what the government says. Nick Clegg – what can we say? Useless bastard? Total asshole? Rich useless twat? He seems to have the powerful position but instead seems determined to abandon his proclaimed ‘principles’ and utterly destroy his party. Nick Clegg ‘appears’ as Tory as Cameron destroying further and higher education, the Post Office and the National Health Service. The elecorate will recognise that the Lib Dems are Tories destroying everything that they held important.

Back to Tony – when I say “emphatically not” I mean “yes” – Bliar. His first comuppance was the “I’m a fairly straight kinda guy” lie. He’s a lying, little useless shit. He doesn’t understand what truth is. He believes that the words coming from his lips create truth. Years ago Mandy said something along the lines of New Labour create reality. No, reality is going to punch you in the face.


27/11/13 Having received a takedown notice from the Independent newspaper for a different posting, I have reviewed this article which links to an article at the Independent’s website in order to attempt to ensure conformance with copyright laws.

I consider this posting to comply with copyright laws since
a. Only a small portion of the original article has been quoted satisfying the fair use criteria, and / or
b. This posting satisfies the requirements of a derivative work.

Please be assured that this blog is a non-commercial blog (weblog) which does not feature advertising and has not ever produced any income.


Leave a Reply