Secret report: Blair misled public throughout 2002

By Gavin Dahl
Sunday, November 22nd, 2009 -- 4:49 pm
Share on Facebook Stumble This!

tonyblairiraqbasra Secret report: Blair misled public throughout 2002Tony Blair covered up British military plans for a full Iraq invasion throughout 2002, claiming at the time that Britain's objective was "disarmament, not regime change." This and many other damning details are revealed in hundreds of pages of secret government reports obtained by The Sunday Telegraph.

Full transcripts include classified interviews with frustrated British Army commanders and Whitehall officials. Commanders wrote dozens of "post-operational reports" and the Army compiled two "overall lessons learnt" papers.

According to The Telegraph, the leaked report condemns the almost complete absence of contingency planning as a potential breach of Geneva Convention obligations to safeguard civilians. Coalition forces were “ill-prepared and equipped to deal with the problems in the first 100 days” of the occupation.

Blair's lies to Parliament and the public, widespread problems with the Army's supply chain and radio systems, and poor planning for "once Baghdad had fallen" are now confirmed in the public eye.

Particularly egregious are statements Blair made to Parliament in the build up to the invasion. On Sept 24, 2002, Mr. Blair told members of the British Parliament, “In respect of any military options, we are not at the stage of deciding those options but, of course, it is important — should we get to that point — that we have the fullest possible discussion of those options.”

Story continues below...

The Telegraph reports, however, that according to leaked documents, “formation-level planning for a deployment took place from February 2002.”

The documents quote British Maj. Gen. Graeme Lamb, director of special forces during the war, as saying: “I had been working the war up since early 2002.”

Former Whitehall civil servant Sir John Chilcot is due to begin an inquiry into Iraq this week. Many of the leaked documents will very likely be seen by Chilcot's committee, but it is unknown whether the tribunal will publish them.

Relatives of the dead, senior military officers and a few members of the press hope the Iraq Inquiry will not be a simple whitewash.

Share this article:
  • Print
  • email
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Story comments are below...

  • jeffersonperrin
    Blair is God's gift to Americans who have been praying that the fools, morons, simpeltons, liars, war profiteers and murderers among us are exposed and brought to justice. Truth is what these people fear more than anything and while they may be able to prevent the truth from coming out through legal means in our own country, it does not appear that Blair will be so lucky. And his crimes revealed are Bush's crimes revealed.
    You simpletons out there(you know who you are; you think Sarah Palin has brilliant brain when really she's brillo brain) aren't smart enough to realize the reason the Republican, Neo Conservative, Independent GOP cult fears terror trials by a civilian court is that civilians cannot be ordered to conceal the truth as a General might be.
  • LWells
    jefferson,

    Unfortunately, they have already been exposed. The facts of the push to war have been out there for quite some time now. The media just acts as if the lies told by the war criminals should have equal footing with the truth. By doing so, there is no factual national narrative of the run up to the invasion, so the criminals go free. Same with torture. Same with political prosecutions. Same with election fraud/tampering. Same with Katrina. Same with the economic collapse. Same with the anthrax attacks. Same with the entire "war on terror". Same with health care reform. Same with economic policy...

    There will be no justice. The rule of law does not apply to royalty. The facts are known. There is no truthful narrative and therefore no shared cry for justice.
  • alyalyinfree
    The truth you write makes me cry. How can everyone not respond in kind to the continued injustice, deceit, and criminality on such a grand scale?
  • LWells
    That's just it. They don't think it is injustice, deceit, and criminality. They have been told, and they readily believe, for ideological and cultural reasons, that the accusers are either politically motivated or deceitful themselves. And they are given a media that will uncritically feed them arguments that support their point of view, accurate or not.
  • Fake Name
    ***There will be no justice. The rule of law does not apply to royalty. The facts are known. There is no truthful narrative and therefore no shared cry for justice.***

    There won't be unless people overthrow these obnoxious Pinky-and-the-Brain wannabes, but no one wants to get their hands dirty, so what's the point of bitching about it? Our only means to put an end to this horseshit, violence, has been declared morally wrong by the left and anyone who tries to use it or even mentions it will be shot down vehemently by them, so what's the point?
  • johnnyenglish
    jeffersonperrin: Sorry to destroy your faith in the British legal system but most people in the UK think this latest enquiry will be just another whitewash and cover-up as it was with The Hutton enquiry.

    The Independent Sunday, 22 November 2009

    Oliver Miles: The key question – is Blair a war criminal?

    The Iraq inquiry

    The Prime Minister's choice of the members of the committee has been criticised. None is a military man, Sir John Chilcot was a member of the Hutton inquiry and has been closely involved with the security services, Baroness Prashar has no relevant experience, Sir Roderic Lyne was a serving ambassador at the time of the war, and so on.

    Rather less attention has been paid to the curious appointment of two historians (which seems a lot, out of a total of five), both strong supporters of Tony Blair and/or the Iraq war. In December 2004 Sir Martin Gilbert, while pointing out that the "war on terror" was not a third world war, wrote that Bush and Blair "may well, with the passage of time and the opening of the archives, join the ranks of Roosevelt and Churchill" – an eccentric opinion that would seem to rule him out as a member of the committee. Sir Lawrence Freedman is the reputed architect of the "Blair doctrine" of humanitarian intervention, which was invoked in Kosovo and Afghanistan as well as Iraq.

    Both Gilbert and Freedman are Jewish, and Gilbert at least has a record of active support for Zionism. Such facts are not usually mentioned in the mainstream British and American media, but The Jewish Chronicle and the Israeli media have no such inhibitions, and the Arabic media both in London and in the region are usually not far behind.

    The Independent is known to be pretty straight when it comes to reporting and is therefore quite unpopular with most politicians in the UK.
  • nagamaki
    there's that word again, misled, how about we stop sugar coating all this misled BS and call what Blair did for dubya what it really is, a big F'ing lie and part of a war crime!
  • amdale
    blair broke the NURMBERG LAWS
    he persued AGGRESSIVE WARS against Iraq & Afghanistan

    the NUREMBERG LAWS were set up to stop countries that WERE NOT attacked from waging AGGRESSIVE WARS against INNOCENT countries

    neither Irag & Afghanistan were responsible for 9/11
    19 men from Saudi Arabia WERE [except for the 7 still alive - check BBC]
    neither Iraq & Afghanistan have or had WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
    Iraq was not capable of launching attacks on British Forces in Cyprus 45 minutes away
    blair is responsible for the MURDER of DR DAVID KELLY

    try him for WAR CRIMES
    as payment for the MASS SLAUGHTER of innocent CIVILIANS in Iraq & Afghanistan
  • bickle2
    Don't use the term mislead. You need to use the word LIE. each and every time. These people are criminals, and there can be no doubt that what they did was deliberate and hasd murdered countless thousands. Blair, Bush, Cheney, Rummy, the lot of them need to be brought before the international court, and if found guilty imprisoned for the rest of their natural lives
  • therealjoeschmoe
    Tony better not take any solo walks in the woods any time soon... Or go hunting with Dick.
  • glenn_uk
    An Inquiry. Oh yes indeed, how jolly British of us. And so Lord this or Sir that can declare - most officially - that Nobody Whomsoever is to blame, and we can all go forward with Lessons Learned.

    Just add this final report to the teetering pile generated by one Inquiry after another, to divert attention and bury blame for just a smattering of the crimes committed by Blair's thoroughly traitorous administration. This is the way we British deal with major scandal in high office. Those not so glaringly apparent are just brazened through.
  • texasaggie
    Well, at least we have the precedent here in the US. We needn't feel as if we are the only bunch of spineless marshmallows in this world. It would be nice, however, if you guys showed some intestinal fortitude. It would sure put the pressure on the chocolate eclairs here in Washington.
  • johnnyenglish
    We ain't spineless mate, the great majority of British people know Blair is a lying money grabbing bastard but unfortunately we are ruled over by a alliance of the major political parties, the establishment and their media monkeys in the BBC who are so out of touch and removed from the ordinary Brit they don't realise they are sitting on a powder keg that won't take much to ignite. Just look at the way we Brits were contemptuously ignored when promised a referendum on the EU treaty, this on top of an expenses scandal where it was proved most MPs were on the fiddle. No sad to say there's no respect for our leaders any more, we don't believe anything they say, not since Blair and just laugh at their promises, reasons for being in Iraq and Afghanistan and findings from enquiries that we know are quite meaningless.
  • airjackie
    Will Blair fall on the sword for Bush? Will the investigation fine out that Dr. Kelly was assassinated by Cheney's squad to keep him from testifing? Will the report show all those who were paid to push the lies for the Bush Administration? This is just the beginning of the Crime of the Century and Tony Blair is just a small part of the big picture. Blair sold out for the money and the favors given by Bush and Cheney. After Secretary of State Powell lied to the UN and no one believed it, the Bush Team brought Blair. Yes Blair was given money and a job as well as his son. Following the money and the bodies to get the truth.
  • He lied to his mortgage providers, too, repeatedly over many years, about more than one property. Of less global importance than Iraq, perhaps, but as a fairly straightforward and non-controversial direct route to Durham jail...
  • Pickerl
    What!? A politician misleading the sheeple. I'm sure glad our GW didn't do that. Anyone notice how Dubbya has all but vanished? Cheany is out trying to save his ass. F--k them all, politicians really suck. Now McCain is saying that we have to stay the course in Afghanistan; Why John to poke those commie bastards in the ribs because they only hung on for ten years before they lost or does it have to do with theoil pipe line that's pumping money to you and yours?
  • bushfatigue
    Yes, perhaps "enhanced interrogation techniques" will lead him to admit that he and Bush began planning the invasion in early 2002, while Bush began the unconscionable hype of the threat posed by Hussein to frighten the Congress and public into thinking it was necessary for national security.
  • pitbullstew
  • Name
    Oh no! Next they'll tell us Bush also misled the public about the Iraq invasion! It's all just too much to fathom!
  • CaptainCrunch
    Poodle won't take the alone, he'll take Americans involved with him. Truth= Katherinne Gunn, Downing Street Memos. The "secret report" isn't one to anyone paying attention...
blog comments powered by Disqus