Confidential Memo Reveals US Plan to Provoke an Invasion of Iraq
A confidential record of a meeting between President Bush and Tony Blair before the invasion of Iraq, outlining their intention to go to war without a second United Nations resolution, will be an explosive issue for the official inquiry into the UK's role in toppling Saddam Hussein.
The memo, written on 31 January 2003, almost two months before the invasion and seen by the Observer, confirms that as the two men became increasingly aware UN inspectors would fail to find weapons of mass destruction (WMD) they had to contemplate alternative scenarios that might trigger a second resolution legitimising military action.
Bush told Blair the US had drawn up a provocative plan "to fly U2 reconnaissance aircraft painted in UN colours over Iraq with fighter cover". Bush said that if Saddam fired at the planes this would put the Iraqi leader in breach of UN resolutions.
The president expressed hopes that an Iraqi defector would be "brought out" to give a public presentation on Saddam's WMD or that someone might assassinate the Iraqi leader. However, Bush confirmed even without a second resolution, the US was prepared for military action. The memo said Blair told Bush he was "solidly with the president".
The five-page document, written by Blair's foreign policy adviser, Sir David Manning, and copied to Sir Jeremy Greenstock, the UK ambassador to the UN, Jonathan Powell, Blair's chief of staff, the chief of the defence staff, Admiral Lord Boyce, and the UK's ambassador to Washington, Sir Christopher Meyer, outlines how Bush told Blair he had decided on a start date for the war.
Paraphrasing Bush's comments at the meeting, Manning, noted: "The start date for the military campaign was now pencilled in for 10 March. This was when the bombing would begin."
Last night an expert on international law who is familar with the memo's contents said it provided vital evidence into the two men's frames of mind as they considered the invasion and its aftermath and must be presented to the Chilcott inquiry established by Gordon Brown to examine the causes, conduct and consequences of the Iraq war.
Philippe Sands, QC, a professor of law at University College London who is expected to give evidence to the inquiry, said confidential material such as the memo was of national importance, making it vital that the inquiry is not held in private, as Brown originally envisioned.
In today's Observer, Sands writes: "Documents like this raise issues of national embarrassment, not national security. The restoration of public confidence requires this new inquiry to be transparent. Contentious matters should not be kept out of the public domain, even in the run-up to an election."
The memo notes there had been a shift in the two men's thinking on Iraq by late January 2003 and that preparing for war was now their priority. "Our diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning," Manning writes. This was despite the fact Blair that had yet to receive advice on the legality of the war from the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, which did not arrive until 7 March 2003 - 13 days before the bombing campaign started.
In his article today, Sands says the memo raises questions about the selection of the chair of the inquiry. Sir John Chilcott sat on the 2004 Butler inquiry, which examined the reliability of intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq war, and would have been privy to the document's contents - and the doubts about WMD running to the highest levels of the US and UK governments.
Many senior legal experts have expressed dismay that Chilcott has been selected to chair the inquiry as he is considered to be close to the security services after his time spent as a civil servant in Northern Ireland.
Brown had believed that allowing the Chilcott inquiry to hold private hearings would allow witnesses to be candid. But after bereaved families and antiwar campaigners expressed outrage, the prime minister wrote to Chilcott to say that if the panel can show witnesses and national security issues will not be compromised by public hearings, he will change his stance.
Lord Guthrie, a former chief of the defence staff under Blair, described the memo as "quite shocking". He said that it underscored why the Chilcott inquiry must be seen to be a robust investigation: "It's important that the inquiry is not a whitewash as these inquiries often are."
This year, the Dutch government launched its own inquiry into its support for the war. Significantly, the inquiry will see all the intelligence shared with the Dutch intelligence services by MI5 and MI6. The inquiry intends to publish its report in November - suggesting that confidential information about the role played by the UK and the US could become public before Chilcott's inquiry reports next year.
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
34 Comments so far
Show AllTony Blur, Maggie Thatcher's illegitimate son, as he's known in Scotland, and wrecker of the once great British Labor Party damn well knew. But it does look as if a cover up is on in the British parlance, with this big wig from the British security services set to head the investigation of the whole matter. This stinks to high heaven.
Hey, at least with a Conservative or Tory victory in the next British general election Labor will get rid of the rid of its Blairite dead wood, then they can come back to win in a few years, as we're in for a 1930s style depression.
The left should be rolling to victory in few yeas in key countries, which leaves out the US basket case, which may be get the opportunity to become a UN trusteeship, if we're lucky.
AD
Bring America Back !!!!................Notice the obsessive compulsion of both Bush and Blair to use "AIRCRAFT" as the provocation to take their Nations into War !
****Sound familiar ? Does anybody not believe the same mentality would show these two 'Leaders' of the free world using "Aircraft" to pull off the attacks of 9/11 !! A false flag attack.
****Unless of course you still believe a cave-dwelling boogieman and his 19 airline school flunkouts pulled off the absolute technical genius that was 9/11 ??????
****Prez Obama professes to believe it, and is getting measured for his 'W' flight suit, and his banner with a proud "mission accomplished" slogan.
I have a lot of questions about 9-11...too many coincidences, BUT, c'mon now, it doesn't take "absolute technical genius" to have a group of teams with box-cutters, hijack some planes and fly them into buildings. I believe there has even been a couple of cases of amateurs landing big planes, which as a former pilot, I can say is way harder than pointing a plane at a building and flying into it. So much of the 9-11 talk is such total nonsense that I sometimes wonder who is promoting such silly stuff? Unthinking people? Right wing trolls?
Here, here!
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" -Epicurus
Wait... there was a war????
Deepa
Why this age-old news??? .
Moreover, US is in the "move forward" gear. In this gear, it is concerned more about "democracy" in Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Bolivia....
Now Tony Blair is "peace (read "piece")" ambassodor. Who knows one day Bush too might become "peace" ambassador.
So in the US "move forward" vision, Blair and Bush are the "peace makers", not "peace breakers".
Age-old news becomes history.
The legal term for Bush and Blair's "old news" is called MENS REA. It is used in courts when pre-meditation is part of a crime. It also include malice and forethought.
Obama and our news media have some heavy ignoring to do. Yes, of course, let's move forward. These inconvenient lumps we keep having to step over may be dead bodies but they were killed in the past and we want to move forward while we move forward to make progress for the American people and move forward. By the way, did I mention Obama wants to move forward?
I thought I'd seen the U2 idea before. Here it is in 2006.
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Bush_Gang/Bush_Blair_Deal_Iraq.html
No-one took any notice of this then. The only hope is that the British press go hard on the enquiry and some MSM in the US wakes up and starts stirring but I don't have a great deal of confidence that it will happen.
I'm sceptical that the U2 idea would have worked for the reasons mentioned above, but Bush probably wouldn't know that!
I would like to see the memos behind the Bush(41)/Cheney Provocations of the First Gulf War.
Have you ever wondered why Common Dreams does not push for an independent investigation of the attacks of 9/11?
The attacks in Afghanistan and Iraq never happen if the attacks of 9/11 don't happen.....Let's see: Eyewitnesses, including reporters, report explosions at the three buildings, scientists have found traces of thermite in the dust from the World Trade Centers,one of the videos of the Pentagon is released and it does not show a 757 striking the the Pentagon (All the other videos are sealed), a U.S Air Force Command Center 747 is seen flying over Washington D.C. during the attacks yet no fighters were scrambled to prevent the attacks, and much more....
The money links to the terrorists went back to the ISI of Pakistan, The U.S. Department of Defense, The Saudi Arabian Royal Family (See Philip Shenon's "The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Commission")......The CIA issued visas to most of the terrorists through the U.S. Embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.....they entered with their real names and some were on the FBI terrorist list....
So Plan "A" for Iraq Invasion was not working...So, Tony and George were going to try Plan "B".....another false flag scheme........Instead they used "The Yellow Cake Story" (Go back to July 2006 Vanity Fair Story, "The War They Wanted, The Lies They Needed")
Get real, President Barack Obama has chosen to conceal and seal evidence of crimes from: Perjury, Illegal Wiretapping, Kidnapping, Bribery, Theft of Billions,Fraud, Torture, Murder, and Crimes Against Humanity.........and he has no choice! He and his Council on Foreign Relations are all Kissinger/Rockefeller LOOK A LIKES.....and could care less about human life: What value does an unarmed Afghan have to the "Power Elite"? NONE What value does an unarmed Iraqi have to the "Power Elite"? NONE What value does a low income soldier have to the "Power Elite"? $500,000 and hundreds of suicides........
What value did the attacks of 9/11 and the subsequent Invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan have for the "Power Elite"? TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS and Control of the Persian Gulf Oil and the maintenance of over 1,000 U.S. Bases....Thank you Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski
Notice how Matt Rothschild (writes for the Nation and Progressive) says that this is all nutty "conspiracy theory"? Why would a so-called progressive author (and he is not the only one) advocate believing in the official propaganda?
-- Have you ever wondered why Common Dreams does not push for an independent investigation of the attacks of 9/11? --
Well, at least you can mention this here. Post this on dailykos and you will get banned for life.
CD is not a political action group. They are a 501c3 and can educate, but cannot actively lobby. As it says in the About Us:
"We provide the Internet meeting space, the news and views, the tools.
You bring your creativity, your energy, and your passion for the progressive ideals that are at the heart of all of our hopes and dreams."
"but cannot actively lobby. "
Lame excuse. They run articles. They can run any articles they want. Including running articles calling for an investigation. They could even put a banner on their site calling for an investigation, much like they put up banners (every once in a blue moon) advertising protests. None of this would violate their non-profit status.
True, CD cannot actively lobby, but they can improve the format to at least allow its members to connect. As it is, we have no way to contact each other privately, but instead must either give out our email addresses to the whole world, or sit in virtual isolation - which most of us do (as we wonder why the left doesn't organize).
I applaud CD for coming this far and being a voice for the progressive left. However, they can do more to connect the disparate voices that are continuously being isolated by providing more means for us to organize ourselves (as opposed to being organized by CD). Common Dreams is a captive of its own success. There are worse things to have happen.
At the time of this runup to the war the CSIS and other groups in Canada were informing the Prime Minister that not only would such a war be illegal, but that the USA was cooking up the Intel to justify said attack.
I expect much the same was going on in Capital Cities the World over. I do not believe a single countries Government seriously belived Iraq a threat, a supporter of terror or stockpiling WMDS.
Now those that STILL claim the US Justified continue to use the excuse "Every other country thought Iraq had WMDS'
The fact is they did NOT. As these articles indicat even the strongest supporters of the war on Iraq did not believe such weapons would be found.
So what happened? Why did Canada, the Germans the French and other nations NOT speak up and say "Look we have this intel that there ARE NO weapons" ?
It simple. Politics were being played. They all went along with the USA because it was the USA and these countries were more concerned with trade agreements .
Thus when all these same countries remain silent on "Alleged Vote fraud" in Iran, or chime in along with the USA about the same, or all support the policies of Israel in the West Bank or against a Lebanon , it all must be taken with a grain of salt if not the entire boxful
The caption to the above photo reads:
British Prime Minister Gordon of Khartoum and United States President Borax Obysmal shake hands after signing the Gordon-Obysmal Agreement to carve up the Middle East between the two nations.
This is clearly not possible because many posters don't believe the CIA is involved in Iran...
or something like that.
Um, why is the Observer -- and by extension CD -- running five-year-old news?
This is archive material. The U.S. populace ignored it the first time around and will continue doing so now.
My thoughts exactly.
Probably because the Brits are in the process of setting up an 'inquiry' into the causes and actions of the invasion.
Yeah... and in Britain we believe in having the widest spread of social opinion for such an inquiry, which is why PM Gordon Brown chose to have the inquiry in private with the widest spread of opinion of five people all of them Knights... no I lie it was four knights... the fifth is a Baroness... that must have Tony Blair quaking in his boots that the inquiry will finally expose and prove that the UK's Intel was just a rewrite of the State Department dossier dropped off by Colin Powell on his way to tell lies to the UN to do Halliburton's boy, Dick Cheney's bidding.
The corporate media refused to report on the Downing Street Memos which proved the facts were fixed regarding the case made for the Iraq war.
Virtually the entire U.S. population, to this day, is unaware of the memos or their contents.
Impeachment should've started the day after the memos were leaked.
Every newspaper in the country should've had headlines in gigantic type: BUSH LIED COUNTRY INTO IRAQ WAR: IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY IMMINENT.
But the media pretended the memos didn't exist.
So here we are 6 years later with wars stretching into three countries, one million dead, 3 trillion dollars stolen from the Treasury and two more wars simmering.
Anyone who thinks democracy can function without a free and independent press needs their head examined.
----------------------------
Whoever controls the media controls the country. Period.
Good post; this whole business doesen't matter anymore since the current puppet Emperor will not prosecute the regime of the last puppet Emperor. We have to "look forward" (translation: turn a blind eye to: High Treason, War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity, etc.). I am just about sick of these stupid buzzword meaningless euphemistic metaphors: "off the table" "look forward" "not look backwards" "the way forward" What a load of idiotic nonsense.
odoco
Exactly what I was thinking! But I still think it is relevant, sensing that finally the Brits might actually use 'evidence' to hold someone accountable. Obviously Obama has no such intentions in this country, which, as I have stated before, makes him an accomplice to war crimes.
I am not radical for all you government watchdogs reading this - but I am a student of the 'actual' law and of history. When one actively seeks to cover up a crime it is called obstruction of justice. Wasn't that part of the case against Nixon that forced him to resign?
I don't care if Obama can walk on water, actually pass some type of public health care plan (which he isn't), predict the future, or clean up the financial mess (which he isn't). If he does not become more transparent, if he does not prosecute those responsible for crimes against humanity, he is not worthy to hold the office. I mean no personal malice, no physical injury - please note that! I do want a president who has enough integrity and courage to simply enforce the law.
"Without justice, what are kingdoms but bands of robbers?" Saint Augustine
"Um, why is the Observer -- and by extension CD -- running five-year-old news?"
Maybe because the report just came to light, making it today's news?
Maybe because history, no matter how recent or ancient, can always instruct us?
Maybe because some things never change and we need to keep being reminded of that?
This is not archival material. We are still occupying Iraq due to lies. The fact that we are still there instructs us that we still haven't gotten the message. If it needs to be repeated 1,001 more times, so be it.
It's news because it is yet another piece of evidence confirming the premeditated murder of Iraqis and of illegal orders being issued to troops. Bush, Blair, Cheney, et al all face the hangman's noose, or ought to, because of this memo and others like it.
Another drop in the torrent of evidence that the Iraq fiasco was Dubya, Cheney, & Co.'s (with Tony Blair & various others in tow) war of choice. In an ideal world, this would be part of the evidence used against them in a Nuremberg style proceeding.
Silly Brits, trying to hold Blair accountable. We'd NEVER do that with Bush here in the good old US of A.
Bush told Blair the US had drawn up a provocative plan "to fly U2 reconnaissance aircraft painted in UN colours over Iraq with fighter cover".
Umm, we spend tax dollars on stuff like this?
'the study to provoke Iraq into a war'
This doesn't sound right:
"to fly U2 reconnaissance aircraft painted in UN colours over Iraq with fighter cover"
The U2 operates at an altitude that fighters do not normally fly at (not to mention at 70,000 feet, I don't think anyone is going to distinguish UN, US or any markings on the airframe.). And cover from what? The only way that plane is getting knocked out is by a SAM. Fighters don't protect for that. It would be nice to see the actual memo to get the exact wording.
Yes and War criminals always don't sound right.
Bush decided to go to war before he said this so this could be a way to say he was just joking or he is a stupid fool or that he wants to sound insane so he could plead all of the above.
We'll see and have seen enough already.
lock these two assholes up.
in solitary so they can communicate with their god.