IoS Exclusive: Untouchable: Blair to give Iraq War evidence in secret

[Turborama]

Source: Independent on Sunday

Key parts of Tony Blair's evidence to the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq War will be held in secret, sources close to the hearings revealed last night.

His conversations with President George Bush when he was prime minister, and crucial details of the decision-making process that led Britain into war, will fall under the scope of national security and the protection of Britain's relations with the US.

But there are also suggestions by well-placed sources that anything "interesting" will also be shrouded in secrecy, leaving his public appearance containing little more than is already known.

The revelation will dash hopes that Mr Blair will finally detail in public why he committed British troops to the disastrous military invasion on the basis of flimsy intelligence.

The Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg last night condemned the move, saying if a significant proportion of Mr Blair's evidence were held in private then the public would "rightly conclude that the inquiry is simply too weak to give us the truth".

=snip=

All of the evidence held behind closed doors is expected to be redacted from the Chilcot panel's final report on the war.

Read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/untouchable-blair-to-give-iraq-war-evidence-in-secret-1839289.html

---

Blair's MO at the moment is to answer any questions about his involvement in the Iraq war with: he can't go into it and we'll have to wait until the inquiry. An inquiry that we now know will keep his testimony secret.

In this recent interview with David Frost, for example (12:55 to 14:55): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tasKsMLG8dY

The Independent article goes on to say how the inquiry is already turning out to be a sham because the panel are failing to ask pertinent follow up questions.

[IndianaGreen]

1. Blair is a self-confessed war criminal and should be treated as such!

Tony Blair attacked over Iraq war 'justification'

Tony Blair is facing strong criticism after he said he would have gone to war in Iraq even if he had known there were not any weapons of mass destruction.

<snip>

Conservative MP Richard Ottoway, a member of Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee, said Mr Blair's comments were a "cynical ploy to soften up public opinion" before his appearance at the Iraq Inquiry.

Mr Ottoway added that Mr Blair had misled parliament on "more than one occasion" and that people would be "dismayed" that what was the "most significant foreign affairs initiative since World War II had been debated on a false premise".

He added that some MPs may had made a different decision had they known the "full unvarnished truth".

Former Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell agreed, saying he would have failed to obtain the support of the Commons.

Reg Keys, the father of a British soldier killed in Iraq in 2003, said he was "absolutely flabbergasted" at Mr Blair's statement and he thought Mr Blair was trying to "struggling to find some moral high ground in order to justify the total farce of the Iraq invasion".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8410071.stm

[Rosa Luxemburg]

2. it's all cloak and dagger

maybe they should ask blair about the 9/11 attacks too?

[CJCRANE]

9. Not without Cheney holding his hand

like little Shrubbie did.

[Prophet 451]

3. Buggeration

While I can understand the need for some of the testimony to be secret (to protect confidential sources, for example), this is shaping up to be another whitewash. Still, at the very least, it'll hopefully derail Blair's campaign for EU president.

[IndianaGreen]

4. Blair was already rejected as EU President

Part of the reason was because of his personality, and his role in Iraq war.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

12. Good

he doesn't deserve it. Unless he can offer the real explanation for his actions

[Prophet 451]

17. That's a relief

I had nightmares of having to listen to the smarmy bastard for years.

[dipsydoodle]

5. Good

Just another nail in the coffin for that bunch of tossers aka New Labour.

[Turborama]

13. The only trouble with that is...

...the Conservatives (who are just as bad, if not worse) take over. Or is there a possibility of the Liberal Democrats making significant gains next year?

[dipsydoodle]

14. Believe it or not

I'd settle for anyone other than the BNP.

Trust, like the soul , once departed never returns.

[Turborama]

15. Cameron's deal with Murdoch concerns me

If the Tories get in I don't think it'll be long before the BBC whithers on the vine and Britain has its own version of Faux news. Brown is an asshole who needs to be replaced (shame there aren't primaries in the UK like there are in the US) but I wouldn't trust Cameron as far as I can throw him, either. The forthcoming televised debates should be interesting, though.

Murdoch-Tory Deal
Echoing the views of the business secretary, Lord Mandelson, Bradshaw says of News International and the Tories: "There is no doubt there's a deal ... The Tories have basically subcontracted their media and broadcasting policy to News International. It's brazen." He fires off a list of Tory policies – including a commitment to TV news free from impartiality rules and Cameron's promise to rein in the media regulator, Ofcom – to demonstrate the extent of the collusion between the two, publicly denied by members of the shadow cabinet.

Has a deal really been hammered out over a dining table in north Oxfordshire, where News International executives and members of the Tory high command occasionally socialise at weekends? "It's more than one table," Bradshaw says. "I know people who have been at these discussions. The proof of the pudding is in the policy."

His own spat with the BBC was prompted by government plans to "top-slice" the licence fee, using some of the money earmarked to help meet the cost of digital switchover – around £130m – to replace regional news on ITV. "That's still our preferred option," Bradshaw says.

Full article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/nov/23/ben-bradshaw-digital-economy-bill

[dipsydoodle]

18. The Beeb operates under a Royal Charter

The Royal Charter is the constitutional basis for the BBC. It sets out the public purposes of the BBC, guarantees its independence, and outlines the duties of the Trust and the Executive Board. The current Charter runs until 31 December 2016. http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/about/how_we_govern/charter_and_agreement/index.shtml

So - don't really matter what Cameron might think he can do as the fact is he can't. Well prior to De. '16 if any changes were mooted the public would mobilise against them. Auntie is special :)

[dixiegrrrrl]

6. What's the point of having an inquiry then?

[JohnyCanuck]

7. That's an easy one.

For the same reson there was a 9/11 Commission.

To provide a whitewash and cover up of the real facts while presenting a superficial appearance to the public that something significant was being done to investigate possible wrongdoing, negligence or dereliction of duty by those in authority.

[dixiegrrrrl]

11. Perfect definition. Almost clinically perfect.

It should be an entry in the Urban or Political dictionary.

[Solly Mack]

8. K&R

[swilton]

10. The secrecy is designed to protect the government stooges

from the public not to protect sources and methods. How convenient for Blair. I knew that he would try to weasel out of this investigation. I can see Bush & his cronies applauding at this charade of justice backstage.

[AzDar]

16. Kick

:kick: