Iraq War Inquiry, Day Eight

( – promoted by buhdydharma )

Friday, 12.04.09, was the eighth day of the British Iraq War Inquiry which has been bringing forth some very interesting, and adding to the possibility of incriminating, pieces of information pertaining to what had been going on within the administration of President Bush prior to what happened on Sept 11 2001, on the day of the destructive deadly attacks of Sept 11 2001 and in the immediate days following and leading up to the invasion and lack of concern about after the destruction and then occupation of Iraq.

Before, on and right after 9/11 the administration was seemingly more focused on Iraq and not on Afghanistan as the evidence grew that the al Qaeda group, harbored by the Taliban in Afghanistan, were the criminal terrorist who carried out the attacks that tragic day. While planning and placing military troops, U.S. and NATO, in position for an attack and invasion of that country discussion and planning started on also invading Iraq and seeking the needed reasons for such an attack trying to connect Iraq to the 9/11 attacks and support of al Qaeda.

On day seven we find out more about how the issue of Iraq and Saddam was being handled as to the Defense Department and U.S. Military Planners:

The military planning track involved a dialogue between Donald Rumsfeld and the central command at Tampa. The Washington chiefs of staff were less involved. The system of “well-structured” discussions between the state department and the Pentagon and other agencies that had existed at the time of the first Gulf war was not evident this time round.

Boyce mentions the “dysfunctionalism” of Washington. He says that he would find himself briefing his American counterparts on what was happening in different parts of the US administration. Rumsfeld was not sharing information….>>>>>

While most of the reporting about the inquiry is coming out of the British media there are a few popping up here in the states, like this one from the Tennessean

Britain right to open investigation over war

I see that Britain is finally getting to the bottom of the cause and the lies that led up to the invasion of Iraq (“British open inquiry on Iraq war causes,” Nov. 25). Of course, this is more than our own Bush political party will condone.

That’s all well and good for future reference, but it does nothing to punish the perpetrators behind this mass illusion, which was orchestrated by Mr. Bush and his underlings.


We already know that planning for the invasion started when Mr. Bush took the oath of office and had nothing to do with terrorism or weapons of mass destruction.

Evidently part of that oath had nothing to do with honesty….>>>>>

Good to see a few are paying at least a tiny bit of attention, here in this country, as the inquiry unfolds.

Iraq war inquiry sees fingers pointed at US

Lord Boyce called American lack of communication “dysfunctionalism”

The Iraq inquiry has produced another week of compelling evidence.

We are beginning to understand how and why Iraq ended up in such a parlous state after the 2003 invasion.

A number of witnesses have pointed a finger of blame at the United States for the chaos that ensued….>>>>>

I’m beginning to think that if there ever was there won’t be any more high fives or exchange of Christmas cards or gifts in either direction across the pond starting this year, eight years in the Iraq occupation and nine years into the Afghanistan occupation, which now is growing.

Ex-UN weapons inspector condemns Blair, Bush on Iraq

Blix said he warned Blair not to invade

George W. Bush and Tony Blair’s conviction that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was a threat blinded them to the lack of evidence justifying a war to depose him, an ex-UN weapons inspector said Saturday.

Hans Blix, who led the UN weapons inspection team in the run-up to the 2003 invasion, told the Daily Mail that the then US and British leaders had “misled themselves and then they misled the public” about the reason for the conflict….>>>>>

Treasury accused over Iraq funds

The inquiry heard Whitehall was told there was no extra cash for rebuilding

The Treasury refused to release extra funds for the reconstruction of Basra, the Iraq war inquiry has been told.

Dominic Asquith, the former Foreign Office director for Iraq, said more money was requested to help rebuild the southern Iraqi city.

But Mr Asquith said government departments were told they would have to find the cash from existing budgets.

This was despite the fact that rebuilding was supposed to be a high priority for ministers, he added….>>>>>

UK sent large force to Iraq to raise standing with US, Chilcot inquiry hears

Former deputy chief of the defence staff says major military role meant Britain was able to show it was a ‘serious player’

Britain committed a large land force to the invasion of Iraq in an attempt to buy influence with the United States, the official inquiry into the war has been told.

Lieutenant General Sir Anthony Pigott, who was deputy chief of the defence staff responsible for commitments, said that by taking on a major military role the UK was able to show the Americans that it was a “serious player”. After Tony Blair’s meeting with George Bush at the president’s Texas ranch in April 2002, Pigott said he set up a small team to look at the options for military action against Iraq….>>>>>

Everything that is coming out of this inquiry as to what was going on within the British Government and Military can only be thought of as Compounded here in the United States as to our own Government and Military Leaders, we were the driving force the rest were following our lead, which continued!

Brown refused to increase Iraq funds

Gordon Brown as chancellor refused to increase funds for the reconstruction of southern Iraq in spite of pleas for more resources from the frontline, an inquiry heard on Friday.

Dominic Asquith, a senior Foreign Office official, told the Iraq inquiry that efforts to rebuild Basra, where British forces were based, were held back by a lack of money.

“The direction was that this was a high priority but we weren’t being given the extra resources to deliver,” he said. “It was left to Whitehall departments to put the case to the Treasury for resources to cover this to which the answer was ‘There are no resources’.”…>>>>>

And of course we all know, and are living in, what has happened since as to Economies around the globe.

And more information keeps dripping out, one can only imagine, especially as our country moved on from any accountability, what was going on within our own Government and Military, all this while we and others were still occupying Afghanistan and the insurgent forces were growing and improving their tactics and attacks!

Lord Goldsmith ‘was stopped from going to Iraq by John Reid’

Shocking new evidence reveals how the Labour Government bullied the Cabinet Minister who told Tony Blair that the Iraq War was illegal.

Former Defence Secretary John Reid banned the head of the Army, General Sir Mike Jackson, from taking Attorney General Lord Goldsmith to Baghdad to investigate alleged mistreatment of Iraqi civilians by British soldiers.

According to a Ministry of Defence source, Dr Reid told the Army chief: ‘I’m your commanding officer. You’re not taking Goldsmith with you, is that clear?’


Lord Goldsmith, who was leading moves to crack down on British soldiers accused of brutality against Iraqis, agreed – but when Dr Reid found out, he pulled rank on Sir Mike, one of the most respected British Army commanders of his generation.


Today’s disclosure follows a report in last week’s Mail on Sunday that Lord Goldsmith told Mr Blair eight months before the conflict that it was illegal – and was ‘bullied’ into backing down at the last minute….>>>>>

Wonder if this will get even a slight mention today on our Sunday Morning Talking Heads Shows, just wonderin, especially if any discussion is done as to the escalation of the Afghanistan Conflict by the US and NATO!!


    • icosa on December 6, 2009 at 21:41

    why they are doing this investigation.  I am glad they are but there are reasons and I doubt it is to expose anything.  I can only imagine it is a personal vendetta of some sort…but what/who…very strange to me, very strange.  I guess I just have a problem with the fact that all of sudden someone with power got a conscience.  Will it get to the point of exposing 911..but then that does not seeem to be the point, just UK’s involvement in the mess and blair’s corruption.  They will only go so far and then stop at 9/12.  No investigation ever goes back further than 9/12.  I just don’t get the point.

    Thank you for following this story and will it get mentioned here, I think not….

Comments have been disabled.