Sir John Chilcot, the head of a British inquiry into the invasion of Iraq, has conceded defeat on his efforts to release the details of over 130 conversations between former President Bush and former Prime Minister Tony Blair related to the plot to invade Iraq. Sir John admits now the records will never be made public.
Instead, under the terms of a secretive agreement between the Cameron government and the Obama Administration, the Chilcot Inquiry will only be allowed to give “the gist” of what was discussed in certain of the conversations, and that none of it can provide any information related to President Bush’s views.
Though Sir John himself made it clear this was quite a defeat for his struggling inquiry, the Cameron government tried to spin it as a major accomplishment, saying the gist would be a lot more than they had ever anticipated would be allowed by the US.
The Chilcot Inquiry was announced in June 2009 by the Gordon Brown government, but has stalled for years, with the government promising to “protect” the US from embarrassment in the release. Years later, even predictions of a 2015 publication still look extremely unlikely.
none of it can provide any information related to President Bush’s views
Could it be that they're consistent with
the intelligence and facts are being fixed around the policy?
Or would it be more embarrassing if he believed them?
Or could 'Bush's views' also include his subservience to something other than the USA?
Bilderberg? Carlisle?
Or perhaps it's something more along the lines of Bush's comment that "the Constitution is just a … scrap of paper." He may have implied or stated outright that intelligence and facts don't matter, only the policy of regime change for Iraq.
I don't think this was about regime change in Iraq – or Iran for that matter. If it was they could have accomplished that feat much more easily than the route they took…and much cheaper, financially, politically, and historically because make no bones about it, Dubya was/is very concerned in his historical standing.
Both of these guys should have faced the ICC for war crimes, but then again when you look at the track record of the ICC they only prosecute crimes committed on the African continent….It's true.
That's what the falsified democracy can do to people, not only lying and murdering humans and destroying a nation, but hiding the truth from people to protect their kind of falsified democracy.
Was there ever any doubt
This shows the importance of having a 'safe pair of hands' leading inquiries of this sort.
I heard that there is still classified information from World War I. Why? Because they are still playing the same dirty game and the lies of 1914 lead directly to 2014.