1/31/2011

No Stability In Iraq - Report

Iraqi woman with child selling gum in Baghdad 30th Jan 2011

'Under the security agreement between Washington and Baghdad, US troops will leave Iraq by the end of the year. The Obama administration would consider keeping some troops in Iraq beyond the Dec. 31 deadline, but only if Iraqi leaders ask for them.
More than 200 Iraqis, mostly security forces and Shi’ites, have been killed over the past two weeks in insurgent attacks that underscore the country’s continuing instability. Still, the report warns that a lack of electricity, water, and sewage pose one of the greatest threats to Iraq’s shaky peace.' Report here.

1/30/2011

Egypt Protests And US Semantics

I posted in a speculative piece last week that Obama would tie himself in knots trying to find words that mean nothing in calling/not calling for Mubarak, a US/Israeli stooge, to stand down. He hasn't disappointed but the real verbal acrobat has been Hilary Clinton. Some examples from just the last 24 hours :
She called for Egypt to move toward "real democracy" but also made clear that the United States was not demanding that embattled President Hosni Mubarakstep down in the face of continuing demonstrations.
In a series of television interviews, Clinton also eased slightly off the administration's threats on Friday to yank Egypt's billions in aid, saying such a step was not now 'under discussion.'
Clinton spoke warmly of the Egyptian military as a "respected institution" and advised it to help move the country from its current unrest to an "orderly transition."
"We are urging the Mubarak government, which is still in power; we are urging the military, which is a very respected institution, to do what is necessary to facilitate that kind of orderly transition."
U.S. officials are looking for what they are calling "managed change" -- in other words change that suits America and Israel.
Although the United States has been prodding Mubarak for days to do more to move toward reform, it has avoided becoming too specific out of a desire to allow Mubarak some running room.
Asked if the administration was backing away from the 82-year-old leader, she said: "We don't want to send any message about backing forward or backing away." Backing forward - hmmm.
Clinton said the military "appears to be showing restraint" in its handling of demonstrations so far. But she said the situation remained "volatile and complex."
"We want to see an orderly transition … so that no one fills a void -- that there not be a void," she said.
She said the government needed to open a 'political conversation' with Egyptians who had "legitimate grievances." A political conversation, eh?
"There are many steps that can be taken by reaching out to those who have advocated a peaceful orderly transition," she said.
Clinton made clear that the United States believes the political evolution in Egypt will 'take time.'

Cairo Revolt - Aljazeera Live Feed

Egypt's revolution has been televised and the live feed is HERE.

Fall Of US Toady Regimes - One View From Iran

Kayhan, Islamic Republic of Iran
Middle East Revolutions Herald America's Demise

Are we witnessing the beginning of the end of Western civilization - or to be more accurate - non-Muslim civilization? According to this article by columnist Hussein Shariatmadari of Iran's state-run Kayhan newspaper, ancient prophecies of the Prophet Muhammad are now coming true - and there is little or nothing that Washington can do to avert the end.

By Hussein Shariatmadari

January 26, 2010

In this photographic metaphor for the dissolution of Egypt's regime, a man smashes a rock into smaller pieces to throw at riot police, during a clash in Cairo, Jan. 26.

In the early days of Islam, a mighty army mobilized and headed toward the city of Medina. These "united" enemies had set aside their differences and were gearing up to deal with Islam. The Holy Prophet (SAWA) got together a small group of fighters to defend the city. One of his companions, Salam Farsi, suggested they dig ditches around the city for defense.

[Editor's Note: SAWA stands for "Allah's Praise Be Upon Him and His Kinfolk."]

It was then that the Prophet Muhammad (SAWA) made a prophecy, which was quickly dismissed and ridiculed by the dualists and unbelievers. While digging a ditch, his pick struck a stone and sparked. The Holy Prophet (SAWA) smiled and said, "With this spark, I see Islam conquering Rome and Iran."

It was all-out war between an almighty army and a handful of believers who had nothing to defend their city with but ditches. Yet surprisingly, their Prophet (SAWA) still spoke of conquering the Persian and Roman Empires [Byzantium], the superpowers of the day.

A few years later, the people in Iran and Rome heard news of the prophecy. They felt it was in harmony with conscience and nature, and therefore backed the army of Islam when it entered their countries. With ease and speed, the army of Islam defeated the superpowers of the time because Islam conquered the hearts and minds of the Iranians and Romans - even after the Holy Prophet (SAWA) was no longer among his people.

Flash forward to August, 1981. Islamic Iran had just emerged from a successful revolution and now faced an all-out war. This time around it was a war of parties. The enemies of Islam who lined up against the Islamic Republic of Iran included the United States, Europe, Israel, and many Arab countries. The enemy occupied a significant portion of Iranian soil and many thought it would be difficult if not impossible to take it back, much less defeat the enemy. Indeed, this was thought to be an impossible dream!

But these were merely earthly facts. In those days, the late Imam Khomeini, founder of the Islamic Revolution, was quick and confident enough to send this important message to the world's Muslims - concurrent with the annual Hajj pilgrimage:

"Oh Muslims of the world and the oppressed, stand up and unite to defend Islam and your dignity. Be not afraid of the rhetoric of the world powers because, God Willing, this is the century that the oppressed will hammer the arrogant powers and right will conquer wrong. The world must realize that Iran has finally found its path and will continue to fight to cut off U.S. interests, this enemy of the oppressed nations of the world."

In yet another message the late Imam said, "I assure you that Islam will conquer all key fronts in the world. It will begin with the collapse of the Soviet Union and will complete its course by defeating the United States of America in a not distant future."

After the collapse of the former Soviet Union, Lebanese resistance group Hezbullah defeated the Western-backed invading army of Zionist regime in the 33-day war. The Palestinian resistance group Hamas likewise defeated the invading army of Israel in the 22-day war on Gaza. Now, the people of Yemen have begun an uprising, followed by similar popular movements in Jordan, Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt. All while Islamist political parties have won elections in Iraq and Turkey. While Imam Khomeini is no longer among us, his divine prophecy has turned out to be true.

Indeed, this is the century of defeat for the arrogant powers. And why not? Islam is a belief derived from faith in God Almighty, who fights oppression and seeks justice. Islam is in alliance with nature, wisdom and the knowledge of humanity. Islam doesn’t see death as the end. Islam sees life after death far greater than life on earth.

A belief like this has no geographic boundaries, and since it's based within the hearts of Muslims, it needs no visa to pass through borders to reach the other side of the world. In other words, wherever there is a Muslim or a Muslims area, Islamic movements naturally emerge and give rise to events similar to the Islamic Revolution in Iran. Events unfolding in Tunisia, Egypt, Jordan, Algeria and Yemen are a testament to this.

Take a look at the mottos people are chanting in these nations: "Death to the U.S.," "Death to Israel," "Islam Is My Religion," "We Don’t Want an American Puppet Regime," and "We Are Not Afraid of Death." Aren’t these slogans familiar? Aren’t these the slogans that the Iranian people chanted during the Islamic Revolution back in the late 1970s?

Last Wednesday, The Independent wrote that, "The events in Tunisia are fast spreading across the Middle East. The region is now ready for a revolution and uprising against the pro-U.S. dictators." Robert Fisk, a prominent journalist and Middle East commentator, further wrote in The Independent, "We are witnessing the formation of a new Middle East which is in no way similar to the 'New Middle East' envisioned by the U.S. The U.S. will not like this."

The Christian Science Monitor also wrote of the ongoing events in Egypt, saying that the "revolution in Tunisia is what the people in Egypt want. Soon it will spread across the Middle East with Egypt as its first destination."  
Posted by WORLDMEETS.US

Advisor to [Israel Prime Minister] Netanyahu, Silvan Shalum, expressed his concerns about these events and said, "Islamic countries similar to the one in Iran are being formed around Israel's borders."

A few years ago, The Washington Post wrote, "A new Middle East is being formed. But contrary to Bush’s belief, this new Middle East has Iran at its core."

[Editor's Note: While there have been columns by Independent columnists Robert Fisk and Rupert Cornwell, the links for which we provide below, the Iranian author's quotes are more like paraphrases than direct quotes. The same can be said for quotes from the Christian Science Monitor, The Washington Postand the Israeli official - none could be verified.]


http://worldmeets.us/ http://worldmeets.us/kayhan000044.shtml#ixzz1CWZHiJOd

1/29/2011

Egypt Protests - Live Updates From The Guardian

THIS IS EGYPT'S BERLIN MOMENT

Streets of Cairo 2

Streets of Cairo 29.1.2011

Jasmine Revolution - Anger Spreads In Egypt

How long can Obama twist in the wind over this? Can he abandon the faithful lackey Mubarak? He appealed for a 'positive' outcome to the events, thinking that this was sufficiently meaningless to do for a statement. Positive for whom though? The Egyptian people? Naaawwww, the US and Israel of course.

1/28/2011

Jasmine Revolution - What Is Obama's Call?

Pro-democracy forces demonstrate in Egypt. If this was in some Islamic-slanted state with a clerical government Obama's speechwriters would be having a field day. 'modernising movement' 'the world must support freedom's clarion call' 'zap the Iranians' or some such claptrap. But the current situation unfurling in Cairo is a bit more tricky for O. He needs a strong pro-US Egyptian government in place as another American conduit for influence and mouthpiece at the Arab table. The democratic movement currently demonstrating against 31 years of military rule in Egypt might not play the puppet as obsequiously as the present regime. We at WITC will be watching for the verbal chicanery and semantic acrobatics with which the White House spin men approach this. Much easier for Obama with support for the demonstators in Tunisia. They are not in the US club anyway.

1/26/2011

Key Exchange From Chilcott Inquiry

CHILCOT: 'Is the explanation that we have heard earlier today that it was in the former Prime Minister's nature to move from one big challenge to the next and that the big challenge at that particular time, 2002/3, was Iraq and it was his personal project, is that part of an explanation?'
Turnbull's reply... read it carefully - it's spoken word and not entirely clear.
LORD TURNBULL: 'I think it is the explanation. [His emphasis] You talked to him last week and quite early on -- you know, very early on, even as late as 2001, he is already thinking about Iraq.
It is not that George Bush is dragging him along. He has identified the risk that Iraq -- in his own mind -- I think he was wrong -- but he identified this risk, partly being misled by or misread intelligence  a combination of the two -- that this WMD programme was not active, detailed and growing, but in abeyance and its weakness was being disguised. That's what we effectively know from the survey group*.
Nevertheless, he had formed this view that you couldn't sit back and wait for a rogue state, weapons of mass destruction, and terrorist groups somehow to form an alliance and then attack you at a time of their choosing and you had to go out and deal with it.
Now he had followed this philosophy successfully twice before, and I think he thought he could do it again, but with even less backing from the UN he had pulled off the Kosovo -- rescued Kosovo as a country and safeguarded it and deposed Milosevic. He could do the same again.'

Lord Wilson,Turnbull's   predecessor, told the inquiry that if asked whether there were "proper cabinet" decisions in the run-up to war, he would say "emphatically not".
He said he remembered saying in March 2002, a year before the invasion: "There is a gleam in [Blair's] eye that worries me."
At the time, Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, gave "strong advice" that military action was illegal without a fresh UN security council resolution. Blair's response was: "Well ... ", Wilson told the inquiry.

10 Years of Palestinian Suffering

In pictures from the Independent - gallery here

1/25/2011

Tarok Kolache - Video Clip

On October 6, 2010, Lieutenant Colonel David Flynn, charged with clearing a tiny village in the Arghandab district of southeast Afghanistan, called in 49,200 pounds of rockets and aerial bombs, leveling it completely. According to Paula Broadwell, a former adviser to General David Petraeus, Flynn believed that the village of Tarok Kolache was empty of civilians and full of explosive traps. The Taliban, Broadwell recounted for ForeignPolicy.com, had "conducted an intimidation campaign" to chase away the villagers and promptly set up shop inside the village. In earlier attempts to clear it, Flynn's unit had taken heavy losses, including multiple amputations from homemade explosives and several dead. He decided the only reasonable way to "clear" the mine-riddled village was to bomb it to the ground. When Tarok Kolache's residents tried to return to the homes their families had maintained for generations, they found nothing but dust. Flynn offered them money for reconstruction and reimbursement, but getting it required jumping a long series of bureaucratic hoops, some of them controlled by notoriously corrupt local politicians. Flynn, and later Broadwell, who is also writing a biography of Petraeus, declared it a success. VIDEO CLIP HERE.

Two Former Cabinet Secretaries Contradict Blair Evidence

Tony Blair has given evidence twice to the Chilcott Commission after his first appearance was deemed unconvincing. The former Prime Minister told the Iraq Inquiry on Friday that his cabinet were aware from early 2002 that they had endorsed a policy that would probably lead to an attack on Iraq.
But Lord Wilson, who was Cabinet Secretary from 1998 until 2002, and Lord Turnbull who was his successor, have both told the Inquiry that this was not the case.
Lord Wilson claimed that Mr Blair told his cabinet in a meeting in April 2002 that "nothing was imminent".
Echoing evidence given by other Downing Street officials, Lord Wilson described a lack of official cabinet meetings in those crucial 15 months before the invasion in March 2003.
I don't think anyone would have gone away thinking they had authorised a course of action that would lead to military action.
Lord Wilson's evidence to Sir John Chilcot's inquiry
No 10's approach was, he said, "a little different", comparing it with the mechanics of government under Margaret Thatcher.
"Thatcher would have discussions on the sofa, but decisions went to a cabinet committee," Lord Wilson said. "If she was advised to go to a committee, she would."
Numerous witnesses have claimed that under Mr Blair's leadership, the Cabinet was not routinely consulted on key decisions and commitments that were being made regarding Iraq.
Lord Wilson told the Inquiry: "I don't think anyone would have gone away thinking they had authorised a course of action that would lead to military action."

Lord Wilson and Lord Turnbull both gave evidence
His successor, Lord Turnbull, claimed that Mr Blair continually put off Cabinet discussions about the possibility of attacking Iraq in the months before the March 2003 invasion.
"The prime minister basically said, 'well, they [his ministers] knew the score'. That isn't borne out by what actually happened."
Lord Turnbull added: "None of those really key papers [options papers about Iraq and the threat posed] were presented to the cabinet which is why I don't accept the former Prime Minister's claim that they knew the score."
On Friday, when asked whether or not he had ensured his cabinet were fully informed, Tony Blair said: "I don't think there was any doubt about that at all.
"If you went back, unless people were not listening to the news or reading the newspapers, which is not my experience of the Cabinet Ministers, it was the issue the entire time."

1/24/2011

Faces Of Iraqi Grief


Faces of grief from Iraq. Courtesy of the eponymous blog.

http://facesofgrief.blogspot.com/

1/22/2011

Blair At Chilcott - Two Thoughts

I could write volumes in the wake of the slug trail left behind by Blair's appearance at Chilcott yesterday. Much of it has been brilliantly covered in the Guardian and the Independent. Even the Daily Mail hasn't missed him, although for reasons of their own. I will restrict my own, less voluble and articulate, comments to two.

1. Blair, among many other howlers, stated that Paul Bremer, the post invasion Bush-appointed proconsul in Baghdad did 'a pretty good job'. This makes Blair the only person in the world with a good word for Bremer. His reckless and stupid disbanding of the Iraqi Army and Civil Service was a huge contributor to the escalation of the chaos. The financial irregularities, running into billions, have been adequately reported elsewhere. Blair thinks this is 'pretty good', giving an insight to one of his main traits - ignorance.
2. Blair admitted that there were 'conversations' with Israelis at the fateful meeting with George Bush at his Crawford Ranch in 2002. This is a new revelation. For 'conversations' you can read consultations. This was clearly a 'Council of War' with Israel, as always, the eminence grise in the background.
Blair thinks he's off the hook now. Somehow I doubt it. History doesn't forgive.

Blair's Smorgisbord of Deceptions


From The Guardian.Sarah Chapman did not walk out but stayed put, continuing to weep, all the while touching the pendant hanging around her neck: the militarydog-tag of her late brother. Blair was talking about what he called "the pain/gain ratio", the calculus a leader must consider when deciding if military action is worth it. Something in the phrase made her recoil.
And finally, after Chilcot had thanked him for his evidence, the former prime minister got up to leave. As he did, the room burst. "Your lies killed my son," shouted Rose Gentle in a loud, ringing voice, remembering Fusilier Gordon Gentle who was killed in 2004. "I hope you can live with that."
Blair did not look back, nor did he even glance sideways as he brushed past Reg Keys – the father of Lance Corporal Tom Keys – who stood as an anti-war candidate in Blair's Sedgefield constituency in the 2005 general election. "You're a disgrace to your office and to your country," Keys said, all but spitting the words.
Perhaps in anger at Blair's refusal to break his stride, one woman thundered that "He'll never look us in the eye." And then he was gone.
No. He never will look the world in the eye.

1/20/2011

Felicity Arbuthnot On Blair's Lies

"And he smiled a kind of sickly smile, and curled up on the floor, And the subsequent proceedings, interested him no more." (Francis Brett Harte, 1836-1902.)
Charles Anthony Lynton Blair, QC., is set to reappear before the Chilcot Inquiry into the assault on Iraq, on Friday 21st January, with an inside source reported commenting: "There is a feeling ... he wilfully misrepresented the facts." Goodness, surely not.
Personally, one scene encapsulates the invasion - before it even began. I checked in to a small family hotel, on the corniche, in Mosul, northern Iraq. Mosul is in hauntingly beautiful, ancient, Nineveh province, of which Masefield wrote: "Quinquireme of Nineveh from distant Ophir, rowing home to haven, in sunny Palestine, with a cargo of ivory, and apes and peacocks, sandalwood, cedarwood and sweet white wine." The wine came from Mosul grapes. The romance is undimmed, from the spine tinglingly beautiful remains left by the Assyrian Kings (721 BC-626 BC) to the great flocks of birds, who blacken the sky at dawn and dusk, their song rising and falling, filling the senses. I climbed the steep steps to the entrance and anticipated the beams and the "Welcome, welcome, welcome home ..." The lobby was deserted.
It took a moment, then I looked through to the lounge, the entire staff from the owner/Manager to the kitchen boy, were huddled round the television, aware of nothing but Colin Powell's address to the U.N., making it clear that an attack on Iraq was imminent. He cited cited Downing Street's shameful work of fiction ("Iraq - its infrastructure of concealment, deception and intimidation") saying: "I would call my colleagues' attention to the fine paper that the United Kingdom distributed... which describes in exquisite detail Iraqi deception activities." It was 5th February 2003.
I stood behind the group, un-noticed watching in astonishment at purported translated conversations between Iraqi scientists, discussing how to hide their WMDs - a conversation straight out of a Hollywood gangster movie, using expressions utterly alien to the Arab world. Further, there were camps teaching people how to make ricin poisons, numerous munitions bunkers, ballistic missile sites, UAVs (unarmed aerial vehicles) biological weapons, chemical weapons, anthrax. Iraq was a threat to life on earth: "We must not shrink from what is ahead of us", Powell concluded.
The staff switched off the television, clearly stunned, then noticed me. No greeting, just drawn, desperate faces and: "Madam Felicity, are they really going to bomb us again?" My face must have been the answer. The region had anyway been being (illegally) being bombed for thirteen years, by US and UK planes. Evocative ancient homes, standing a few months before, about an eighth of a mile behind the hotel were no more, the hotel had somehow survived. Bombing had increased dramatically over the previous months. I had driven up from Baghdad along the main highway which had many army bases and an air force academy. Iraq had no planes since 1991 and the tanks were all circa 1950's. All were reduced to rubble. I thought of bombings I had visited over the years, the shoes - it is always the shoes that are left. I remembered the child shepherd (10) who had stepped on munition from 1991, which still littered the country. He silently pleaded through his remaining eye. He had also lost his foot. I pondered the years of recording words from broken hearts.
Three days later the Guardian pointed out that the dossier not only plagiarised an old thesis from an American PhD student, but it : ".. appeared to be a journalistic cut and paste job, rather then high grade intelligence analysis."
Yet Blair, whose Faith Foundation : "aims to promote understanding about the world's religions ..." authorised lies of near unprecedented enormity and enjoined Bush's "Crusade", against a crippled country, whose children were dying at an average of seven thousand a month of "embargo related causes", the UN flagged siege driven by the US and the UK. For anyone who has a doubt about the term "Crusade" being a slip of the tongue, "New Yorker" journalist Seymour Hersh cites research for his upcoming book, "The Bush-Cheney Years." After the fall of the regime in 2003: "In the Cheney shop, the attitude was ... 'We're gonna change mosques into cathedrals. And when we get all the oil, nobody's gonna give a damn.' "
However, if Chilcot has no legal authority to prosecute for what former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan finally said was an "illegal" invasion, arguably a war of aggression (Nuremberg's " ... supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole") enough politically weighty rats have plopped over the side of HMS Blair and swum for the shore, to give some hope that they may yet, as in their remit, refer evidence to "the appropriate authorities." The latest to at least damp his fur, is the former Attorney General, The Rt. Hon. the Lord Goldsmith.
On the 30th January 2003 he wrote to Blair that the latest UN Resolution (SCR 1441) "..does not authorise the use of military force ... having considered the arguments ... my view remains that a further decision is required." Suggesting he hear the views of his US counterparts, he wrote: "I am not convinced that this will make any difference to my view .." Blair wrote in the margin: "I just don't understand this." On the 17th March, however, Goldsmith produced a short statement opining the invasion legal. However, documents released to the Inquiry show a vein of deep unease over the legality throughout. On the 20th March., the bombing began.
Iraq, had, of course, on 7th December 2002, delivered to the UN., 12,800 pages, accounting for the weapons it did not have, which was, in a word, stolen by the US delegation to the UN. Under 4,000 pages were returned, so heavily redacted as to be "indecipherable", according to UN Ambassadors contacted at the time. Removed entirely was the index of companies who had sold weapons to Iraq over the years, including those of US., UK., France, Germany and Russia.
In another arguably underhand act, the Cabinet Office has refused the Chilcot Inquiry access to communications between Bush and Blair during the run up to the invasion. Sir John has said: "The Inquiry regards (these) essential to fulfill its terms of reference ..." Indeed. He has written saying that Mr Blair's cross examination would be damaged by witholding the memos.
Blair is appearing in the week that marks exactly twenty years since the forty two day carpet bombing of Iraq in 1991. However, missing evidence or not, there are reports that, like Henry Kissinger, Blair concults his lawyers before he travels, for reassurance that he will not be arrested on arrival.
A little difficulty may arise nearer home soon. On 18th January, Dr Bill Wilson, MSP., convened and chaired a meeting in the Scottish Parliament of: " .. lawyers, academics, MSPs and concerned citizens .. to discuss the incorporation of the International Criminal Court’s definition of the crime of aggression into Scots Law. Consensus was reached that the Scottish Parliament is competent in this respect, and that this can and should be done soon.
Robert Manson, founding member of the UK-based Institute for Law, Accountability & Peace and Don Ferencz, an American lawyer and convenor of the recently-organised Global Institute for the Prevention of Aggression, presented detailed historical and legal arguments before answering questions from the audience, which included MSPs and academics from across Scotland. Among these arguments was that the International Criminal Court (Scotland) Act 2001 incorporated the offences in the 1998 Rome Statute for the Establishment of an International Criminal Court into Scots domestic law, with unanimous support, and that this was done the year before the Rome Statute came into force. Consequently there is no impediment to Scotland adopting the June 2010 Kampala definition of the crime of aggression immediately."
Dr Wilson commented: “As an outcome of the meeting, we have sent an open letter to the Scottish Government Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Kenny MacAskill, asking him to amend the ICC (Scotland) Act 2001, adding the ‘crime of aggression’.
“If we did so it would be an excellent example to the rest of the world. It would send the clear message that we respect international law. It would prevent Scotland being dragged into murky and counterproductive military ventures in the future. I call on all MSPs to support such a move. Scotland could lead the fight against illegal war.”
When I left Mosul, days before the invasion, Western rhetoric trumpeting Saddam Hussein's ability to launch WMDs in Blair's "forty five minutes", I drove again past the ruined bases, the road near empty, no troop movements, military vehicles. In the circumstances, it was surreal. Suddenly, nearing Baghdad, a convoy of army lorries appeared. We neared and overtook. There were eleven of them, early 1950's Mercedes. The tyres were down to the canvas, they were covered in rust - and the one in front was towing the other ten. Dr Wilson's initiative is a vital step towards ensuring that never again are facts "wilfully disregarded", and that those who try, pay the price.

Blair Hauled Back By Chilcott

The solicitor Phil Shiner, an expert on the war's legality, who has represented a number of its victims, said: "Lawyers don't produce 13 pages of carefully argued opinion stating that a second resolution is needed, and then issue a brief statement only days later saying the opposite."
Sources say Blair's previous testimony appears to differ from some given in private by government lawyer Lord Goldsmith and other witnesses, thought to include the former chairman of the joint intelligence committee, Sir John Scarlett.

Evidence previously offered in camera will now be made public and it is believed that conflicting claims made by Scarlett and Blair will be central to the latter's public grilling this week.

Scarlett oversaw the infamous "dodgy dossier" of 2002 which included the now discredited claim that Iraq could deploy weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes.

It is also thought that Blair will face new queries over claims he put pressure on former attorney general Lord Goldsmith to declare the war legal.

Blair will face protests from anti-war campaigners and bereaved relatives of soldiers killed in a mendacious and pernicious campaign. Good luck to the protesters. Watch out for the Met thugs.

1/19/2011

Blair Falsely Accused Chirac Over Iraq Invasion


Tony Blair played the "anti-French card" by falsely blaming then-president Jacques Chirac for the collapse of talks at the United Nations on the 2003 invasion of Iraq, an aide told Britain's war inquiry on Wednesday.
Stephen Wall, Blair's former EU adviser, said the ex-prime minister ordered his media chief Alastair Campbell to tell journalists that Chirac had threatened to veto any Security Council resolution - even though they knew Chirac had not.
"The prime minister was giving Alastair his marching orders to play the anti-French card," Wall told the Iraq war inquiry in London.
"I do recall getting a call from Joyce Quin, a former Europe minister, who said to me 'Do the prime minister and Alastair know that what they're claiming Chirac said isn't what he actually said?' and I said 'Joyce, I believe they do know'."
The evidence comes before Blair is due to make his second appearance before the inquiry on Friday, following a highly charged session in January last year on the lead-up to the invasion.
Blair's dealings with Chirac were famously strained and they clashed over a range of issues, especially the invasion of Iraq, which Chirac steadfastly opposed.
Wall said Blair's actions reflected the strain he was under at the time in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq. Britain eventually pulled out of the country in 2009.
"I can remember about that time Tony Blair coming into my room. He said: 'I am like a man walking across a precipice upon a tightrope with only a straw to balance with.' That was a reflection of how dire the domestic situation was," the aide said.
Chirac earned plaudits for standing up to US president George W. Bush but Blair is still loathed by many for following the United States into Iraq, with protesters saying they will target his appearance at the inquiry this week.                       From AFP

1/18/2011

Chilcott - Golsdmith's Position Is Untenable Even With Hindsight

Former attorney general Lord Goldsmith cannot to be allowed to get away with voicing misgivings about the Iraq invasion with the cushion of seven years of hindsight under his fat arse.
To say seven years later that he felt "uncomfortable" about statements made by Tony Blair in the run-up to the March 2003 invasion is beyond pathetic. Goldsmith confirms now telling Blair what anti-war campaigners said then - namely that UN security council 1441 did not authorise the use of force against Iraq. Even then Blair accepted that a second resolution would be needed to make the war planned by George Bush - and surreptitiously backed by Blair in April 2002 - legal under international law. Blair's pledge to drag this country into an illegal war alongside the US was kept quiet at the time but was nonetheless real. He lied to the people of the UK and to Parliament and was single-minded in covering his criminal behaviour in something approaching legality.
Goldsmith's position can be summarised thus:
Initial silence about his legal advice
Continued silence as Blair misled Parliament
Blurts out truth as the posse closes in.
If Goldsmith had blown the gaff about the legal situation, he would have made it more difficult for spineless Labour backbenchers to allow themselves to be chivvied into the Yes lobby like sheep into a pen. In holding his tongue, Goldsmith failed the people of this country, assisting Blair in his bloody deception. He had a key and unique role to play and weasled out of it. 

Chilcott Disappointed By Cabinet Office Cover Up

STATEMENT FROM INQUIRY PRESS OFFICE TODAY:-
'The papers we hold include the notes which Prime Minister Blair sent to President Bush and the records of their discussions. The Inquiry recognises the privileged nature of those exchanges but, exceptionally, we sought disclosure of key extracts which illuminate Prime Minister Blair’s positions at critical points. The Cabinet Office did not agree this disclosure. On 10 December last year, in accordance with the Protocol, I asked the Cabinet Secretary to review that decision. I also made it clear that, if we could not reach agreement, I would publish the correspondence between us. I am doing so today.
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.'

1/17/2011

Remembering Desert Storm. "This one's for you, Saddam."

With those words an Apache helicopter crew opened fire at 2:39 a.m. in Iraq – 6:39 p.m. in the United States – 20 years ago last night. Operation Desert Storm had begun. 
Strikes were scheduled to hit targets across Baghdad . This was the beginning of carnage that would come over the next 42 days. The strikers were 12 U.S. Army Apache helicopters, guided to their targets by three U.S. Army Special Forces Pave-Low helicopters. Their targets in far western Iraq that night were key radar stations in Saddam Hussein's extensive French-designed air defense network. They were essential for guarding Iraq , its two major airfields in that part of the country – plus, more importantly, launching sites for Saddam's Scud missiles that were targeted against Israel .
CNN's Bernard Shaw told the world that ‘war’ had begun. "Something is happening outside," he said from the Al Rashid Hotel. Operation Desert Shield, launched the previous August following Iraq's conquest of Kuwait, had turned from a massive military buildup into a war that would ultimately stretch from Iraq to Israel, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and south along the Persian Gulf.
"They never saw us coming"
Moments later, 22 F-15E Strike Eagles accompanied by two F-111 electronic jamming aircraft flew undetected through the hole blown in the radar coverage by the Apaches. A Stealth bomber  dropped a 2,000 pound bomb on a key strategic Iraqi communications and radar node at Nukhayb. Located east of where the F-15Es crossed the boarded, Nukhaby had been identified as essential link across much of Iraq 's aerial defence network. With the blows at the border and Nukhaby, the Iraqis lost much of their electronic defense grid. As a result, the F-15Es headed for the Scuds undetected.
"They never saw us coming," recalled retired Lt. Col. James "Chainsaw McCullough," who flew his Strike Eagle along with weapons officer Ansel "Elvis" Mangrum in the backseat of the two-man fighter. Meanwhile, Stealths headed for Baghdad and other high-priority targets. Behind them were coming hundreds of other fighters and bombers from the Air Force, Navy and US Marines. Joining them were British, French, Kuwaiti, Saudi Arabian and other allied aircraft. As the world watched, there began what became the first "TV war" and "Nintendo war" for all the lethal high-tech weapons the U.S. and its allies would unleash remotely and without mercy.
"We will not fail" – Bush Senior
The Associated Press issued a bulletin saying the U.S. military confirmed that war had begun. Shortly afterwards President George H.W. Bush declared: "We will not fail." Saddam, meanwhile, declared in a radio address: "The great showdown has begun." Calling Bush a "criminal," Saddam said the "hypocrites" had struck at 2:30 a.m. Baghdad time. "With the perseverance of the believers, the dawn of victory nears as this great showdown begins."
Forty-two days later, the Iraqis would be driven completely out of Kuwait in a bloodbath which saw minimal casulaties among the American button pushers and playstation heroes.

1/16/2011

Robert Fisk On Ameristan

Even drunk, as he is a bit here, Fisk talks more sense than his interlocutors .

1/15/2011

US Army Collaborations Working Like Clockwork

The paternalistic 'training' of the Iraqis and the Afghans to be good US lapdogs continues to go well as can be seen here and here. The building of puppet regimes and empires of sand seems to present more difficulties than the Pentagon geniuses have foreseen.

1/14/2011

Alastair Campbell On Tony Blair


Campbell's most recent diary releases reveal that:
• Margaret Thatcher told Blair during the Nato bombing mission against Serbia in 1999 that she was "appalled" that the civilian side of Nato – ambassadors based in Brussels – discussed bombing targets.
• Downing Street became so alarmed by the criticism of the Kosovo action by the right that Campbell successfully lobbied two key Thatcher allies – her former foreign affairs adviser Charles Powell and David Hart, her adviser during the miners' strike – for help.
• General Wesley Clark, Nato's supreme allied commander, said the alliance was on the "brink of a disaster" when Campbell was dispatched to Brussels to advise Nato on its communications strategy.
• Excited by the international praise which greeted his landslide victory in 1997, Blair joked with Campbell that it was a pity he was prime minister of such a small country. "It's just a shame Britain is so small, physically," Campbell quotes Blair as saying.
Given that's it's Campbell and Blair you have to add a large dose of skepticism into your reaction as well as have a paper bag handy.