Okay. Here’s the complete memo. Sunday TimesAnd here’s something worse, the bits and pieces of explanation Mr. Kinsley (mentioned yesterday) didn’t have. Sunday TimesI’m going to use bits of it, and hope you read it yourself. And then decide
Okay. Here’s the complete memo. SundayTimes
And here’s something worse, the bits and pieces of explanation Mr. Kinsley (mentioned yesterday) didn’t have. SundayTimes
I’m going to use bits of it, and hope you read it yourself. And then decide maybe it’s time to wake up and smell the coffee. While you still have the right to drink it.
Here are the people involved in the memo–actually the minutes of a meeting that occurred July 23, 2002–eight months before the invasion began. In the room were the prime minister, Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, Geoff Hoon, the defence secretary, Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, and military and intelligence chiefs. Also listed on the minutes are Alastair Campbell, then Blair€™s director of strategy, Jonathan Powell, his chief of staff, and Sally Morgan, director of government relations.
What the Times says is shown in that document–read it for yourself, and see if you agree:
For the secret documents €” seen by The Sunday Times €” reveal that on that Tuesday in 2002:
- Blair was right from the outset committed to supporting US plans for €œregime change€ in Iraq.
- War was already €œseen as inevitable€.
- The attorney-general was already warning of grave doubts about its legality.
Straw even said the case for war was €œthin€. So Blair and his inner circle set about devising a plan to justify invasion.
€œIf the political context were right,€ said Blair, €œpeople would support regime change.€ Straightforward regime change, though, was illegal. They needed another reason.
By the end of the meeting, a possible path to invasion was agreed and it was noted that Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, chief of the defence staff, €œwould send the prime minister full details of the proposed military campaign and possible UK contributions by the end of the week€.
And how about this little fact, apparently not noticed by the LA Times Op-Ed editor?
AS a civil service briefing paper specifically prepared for the July meeting reveals, Blair had made his fundamental decision on Saddam when he met President George W Bush in Crawford, Texas, in April 2002.
€œWhen the prime minister discussed Iraq with President Bush at Crawford in April,€ states the paper, €œhe said that the UK would support military action to bring about regime change.€ (bolding is mine) Can you say, “smoking gun?”
This kind of hurts. €œUS views of international law vary from that of the UK and the international community,€ says the briefing paper. €œRegime change per se is not a proper basis for military action under international law.€ Actually, sir, it’s just that damn cowboy justice. I don’t think regime change is a proper basis for military action either.
Okay, did Mr. Kinsley not do his research? The next contributor to the meeting, according to the minutes, was €œC€, as the chief of MI6 is traditionally known.
Sir Richard Dearlove added nothing to what Scarlett had said about Iraq: his intelligence concerned his recent visit to Washington where he had held talks with George Tenet, director of the CIA. (bolding is mine.) Hmmm. “The usual freelance chatterboxes,” didn’t Mr. Kinsley say?
The Americans had been trying to link Saddam to the 9/11 attacks; but the British knew the evidence was flimsy or non-existent. Dearlove warned the meeting that €œthe intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy€. Yeah, okay, we knew that. Some of us did, anyway. As a bumper sticker I saw today said, “Hey, Mr. Bush, Osama still don’t live in Iraq.”
€œCDS (chief of the defence staff) said that military planners would brief (Donald) Rumsfeld (US defence secretary) on 3 August and Bush on 4 August.€ Does this need a comment from me?
Blair would subsequently portray the key issue to parliament and the people as the threat of WMD; and weeks later he would produce the now notorious €œsexed up€ dossier detailing Iraq€™s suspected nuclear, biological and chemical weapons programmes.
But in the meeting Blair said: €œThe two key issues are whether the military plan works and whether we have the political strategy to give the military plan the space to work.€
I’m telling you. Go read it. And check this out. TheDowningStreetMemo Sure, it’s probably left-wing and liberal and all that crap–but you’re smart enough to see through all that, aren’t you?
By the way, the op-ed piece quoted yesterday is dated June 12, 2005, more than a month after the article quoted above. So Mr. Kinsley does not have the excuse of saying the supporting documents had not been discovered yet. The information was out there. Mr. Kinsley simply didn’t look hard enough.
Maybe he didn’t look at www.downingstreetmemo.com. (linked above.)