Chilcot fury as Blair/Bush memos kept secret

[deminks]

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/foreign-policy/newly-released-iraq-evidence-pours-pressure-on-blair-$21386719.htm#

The Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq war began a new session today, with an angry outburst from the chairman over secrecy from the government.

Sir John Chilcot said that the Cabinet secretary had refused to let him publish memos between Tony Blair and George Bush which revealed the then-prime minister's thoughts in the lead up to war with Iraq.

"The papers we hold include the notes which prime minister Blair sent to President Bush and records of their discussions," Sir John said.

"The inquiry recognises the privileged nature of those exchanges but, exceptionally, we sought disclosure of key extracts which illuminate prime minister Blair's positions at critical points

(end snip)

Looking out for (Bush's) America's interests again, I see.

[Festivito]

1. That's odd language, had as opposed to has. Has he then published it?

"Chilcot said that the Cabinet secretary had refused to let him publish"

So, he had... that's in the past. Now, is now, publish it already.

Sir Gus O' Donnell says he DOES/DID it because: "release would be likely to damage the UK's international relations".

Of course, anyone who would be offended, probably should be, or is already by Gus' ban. So, there.

[gratuitous]

2. There ya go again, lookin' backwards to the past

Look, we could argue all day long about who committed war crimes and crimes against humanity, but the truth is, the PNACers are tired of the continuing occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, too. It's time to look for new fields of conquest, and Iran is just looking ripe for the picking. Can we get a "praise the Lord and pass the ammunition"?

[snot]

3. K&R'd