Home | About | Donate

We Don't Need to Wait for Chilcot, Blair Lied to Us About Iraq. Here's the Evidence


We Don't Need to Wait for Chilcot, Blair Lied to Us About Iraq. Here's the Evidence.

Peter Oborne

Two weeks ago I found myself in conversation with Dr Hans Blix, head of the United Nations weapons inspection team ahead of the Iraq invasion in 2003.

Dr Blix told me that Tony Blair’s claims about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction were simply not an accurate reflection of the intelligence provided to the British government.


Here is the thing. Many people knew THEN that Blair and Bush were outright lying yet that media, including the BBC went along with the lies and helped orchestrate that war.

It is not enough that people publish articles and the media does documentaries some 15 years later as to whether or not the respective nations lied into war. Even were Blair. Bush Cheney and crowd sent to jail it would not be enough. Millions have died since that invasion.

All that would be enough was that the war never happened in the first place which quite impossible leaving us with this. In the next "lie to war" what will the journalists and media do and how will it be stopped?

All one needs to do is look at Syria. Obama and Cameron and the western media are all once again lieing about what goes on there so as to orchestrate another war and the Chilcot inquiry will accomplish nothing in this regard. Will there be another such in another 15 years times after another 2 million plus killed or will we even be around in 15 years time with no media around to give the illusion they work at revealing the truth?

Yes it important to reflect on what occurred when Blair PM and lied a nation into war but it meaningless if those lessons not applied to the governments of today and given how the media reports on Syria and all the evidence that the lies being recycled once more there an immediate need to take that media to task NOW.


Perhaps the BBC will assign "a writer, a researcher and a producer" to ask the last three questions about their own role:

Did the BBC knowingly misrepresent the facts about WMD and Iraq; the legality of war; and the consequences of war?

Hell, look at the first question too:

Did the BBC enter into a secret agreement with the Blair administration...?


Too bad so many people had their death warrants signed by Bush, Blair, Cheney, Condi and many other war criminals, but I blame the Editors of the MSM also as they were cheerleaders for these lies. And the N.Y Times, the BBC, the corporate T.V. media and so many others have the blood of Iraqi's on their hands.


It is well known by readers on this site and other online, independent news media that British and American citizens (as well as other citizens of the so-called "coalition of the willing") were lied into supporting undeclared, illegal wars by a msm news media which in the US is owned by 5 corporations and is a propaganda tool for government (which in fact is owned and controlled by a few very wealthy families). Maj Gen Smedley Butler is a good person to read when beginning your education on why the US is always at war. But, back to this article. I do not think it is illegal for news organizations to print lies; rather, it is up to an informed citizenry to decipher what is truth and what is not. It is the justice system, the 3rd equal branch of our government, which must determine when crimes have been committed and to hold persons who have committed crimes accountable. Yes, the MSM has severely let us down but many of our government leaders over several administration's including several Presidents have seemingly broken both national and international laws of the highest nature. It is those people in government who have to be held accountable before courts of law before US and British citizens gain relief and the millions of people who have died and been irreparably harmed can begin to find justice and peace of mind. Only when an example is made of the criminals acting in our names and with our resources will future leaders think hard about their conduct while in public office!


It would be difficult to imagine an organization more culpable in war crimes than the BBC. It's imagined reputation for any sort or fair mindedness is long gone. Until its editorial board are properly screened and overseen by a public body representing the license payers for fair and unbiased reporting in foreign affairs its a danger to society both at home and abroad.. Its that dumbed down public who are required to provide BBC poison for themselves and their neighbors through the constant ever increasing annual fee as license payers. They pay outrageous sums to have well rewarded faces on their screens reporting Zionist propaganda determined by a corrupted editorial board of directors. While the article doesn't reveal much as Chilcot sets about tidying up his report, its to be welcomed nonetheless!

Tony Blair has made his fortune. Not alone by any means among those within his government who are responsible for high crimes, he represents a prime target for criminal proceedings to be initiated. Then will the whistles start blowing under oath as required? So many lies and so many liars got front stage to promote their pernicious agenda much as the neocons did across the Atlantic except in Britain it was the BBC flagship that provided the red carpet and platform. The example in the article of Alastair Cambell rushing off to the studios with the great idea to misrepresent the UN situation to the British public and what Blair had decided to lie about in order to smear France, tells us all we need to know about how governments operate. The BBC knows this of course, the present government in Britain knows this too but in the particular case at hand it was a lie in order to gain support for what the main protagonists all knew was to now be an illegal war. It was to be an act of aggression that that had already been decided upon.

Then 'shock and awe' began with all the pomp and ceremony that is a hallmark of BBC coverage to the fore and its after shocks continue into the present. The BBC editorial board again is as responsible as it is possible to be in encouraging such illegal war. Its a 'forte' of the organisation as it wishes Britain to punch above its weight in Empire building with its USA partner. Ask the Palestinians about BBC coverage! If the British people want to prevent Cameron's government from following suit on another illegal war abroad then it can best do so now by protesting against their MSM and the BBC in particular.

Next they should without fail examine whether Chilcot provides cover for war crimes and war criminals like Tony Blair? Do they too follow the USA and look forward or do they demand prosecution and criminal trials that will not alone expose their media to scrutiny but will do more for justice to the victims than any other stepping stone to recovery and remedy.

Mr. Peter Osborne among other colleagues of his should ask himself whether his editors should be asked to resign as a service to the nation and whether they themselves should continue to be richly rewarded for their work in an organization that did much through omission, willful deceit and propaganda to promote the infliction of so much unnecessary suffering abroad? It's distorted, selective and biased and its agenda is obvious and evident for all its professionalism. Its not a news worthy organization but an effective mouthpiece for government elites both at home and abroad. It advertises hypnotism for the masses who fund it and leads them along into the dark side with its balance of fear and imagination; but it consistently lies in the same way Blair did only it is disguised with dishonesty and with inherent greed and publicly subsidized, so largely monopolized dominance. Its become a perverted entity. I refer primarily to its foreign affairs coverage and its TV programs. Mr Osborne should know all this too. That is unconscionable betrayal and just like Blair's was it will undoubtedly bring its own rewards..


There was also the Downing Street Memo that the evidence would be fixed. However, the existence of WMD was irrelevant. Even if there were WMD, there was no imminent threat and no justification for an invasion.


One more thing--The Iraq War was an ill-conceived, ill-planned, illegal and immoral war.


The BBC does not just cover up war criminals. Johnny Rotten pointed out that everyone knew about Jimmy Saville decades ago and his perversions and had in fact mentioned it in an interview 20 some years ago after which he was censured as being "incorrigible" even as Mr Savile continued to molest children. The brass at the BBC aided in that coverup.

Tbe BBC is run in the background by that same "class" of people who feel they destined to rule the empire and set its rules and whom feel that their "class" of people above the law.


Yes. Blair must be arraigned under something very similar to the Charter of the International Tribunal for the Nuremberg Trials as signed by any but "the Government of the United States of America, the Provisional Government of the French Republic, the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics". Then the rest, inclusive of most US leaders since the end of the 2nd WW, and plentiful others such as Kissinger and Cheney and the various "Think Tanks" of the USA must follow. If Westerners cannot get this done then their identity will be left defined clearly as sub-human in history and the world will have to push their successors aside in order to get on with living. This is already happening despite the English language presently strutting cock-a-hoop in a hoop only of their silly imagination. (best translation is not having a clue about what or why they are crowing)
In looking for a word to describe what the West has become, retarded comes to mind. This otherwise adult English language led cultural bloc has regressed into childhood and while holding a gun to the head of mankind is serially dirtying its pants while avidly trying to sell the smell not only as fashionable but also as necessary. There are many millions of English speakers who are working against this but, here, to work is not enough. Success in this is the only thing that will save the West and allow it to participate in the future. War Crime trials are absolutely necessary.
Justice must be seen to be done.


The whistleblower from MI5 or MI6, Kelly, made it quite clear after Bliar had gone to war,that Campbell and Bliar had "sexed up" the intelligence reports. Following an enquiry into Kelly's whistleblowing, he was found hanged from a tree, presumed suicide as a result of depression caused by the stress of the inquiry.

Anyone with half a brain could see that Bliar lied, though his speeches to Parliament were superb rhetoric, and that any invasion of Iraq would lead to a three-cornered civil war to be taken advantage by the sort of nasties that come from such places as Saudi Arabia. Indeed a very large number of British opposed the war.

As for lying to parliament; I recall Ernest Profumo, former Tory Minister of Defence, being caught out in a lie about his extra-marital affair with a very attractive young women and being forced to resign. The Tory government of the day fell as a result. Seems war is fine, but no sex please, we are British.


I recall that the BBC, in its internet world news, featured for some weeks wheeled and khaki-coloured Iraqi apparatus that was designed for launching weather balloons; the BBC consistently called them chemical weapons launchers. One trusts that it was an honest mistake.


Bush and Blair misled no one. They only served as the mouthpieces for those who pretended to believe what all knew were lies.


"Two weeks ago I found myself in conversation with Dr Hans Blix...."

"My conversation with Dr Blix was the culminating moment of my search for the truth about how Britain came to invade Iraq."

These two sentences say all one needs to know about the competence of the author of this article. He's just now learning the truth about the illegal, immoral, unjustified invasion of Iraq?! As noted by nearly every commenter here, many if not most of us knew at the time that we were being led like sheep to the slaughter with lies and subterfuge. Where was the author, Peter Oborne, then when we needed him?

Disingenuous articles such as this only add insult to injury.


They obviously misled Peter Oborne, the author of the article if he's only now coming to the conclusion that Saddam had no WMD and we were lied into an illegal invasion of another nation at great peril to us and the world. Where was he at the time? His crocodile tears are too little too late.