Impeach and Prosecute Tony Blair

The Chilcot report’s “findings” have virtually all been part of the public record for a decade, and it avoids key pieces of evidence. Its recommendations are essentially to continue using war as a threat and a tool of foreign policy, but to please try not to lie so much, make sure to win over a bit more of the public, and don’t promise any positive outcomes given the likelihood of catastrophe.

The report is a confused jumble, given that it records evidence of the supreme crime but tries to excuse it. The closer you get to the beginning of the executive summary, the more the report reads as if written by the very criminals it’s reporting on. Yet the report makes clear, as we always knew, that even in 2001-2003 there were honest people working in the British, as also in the U.S., government — some of whom became whistleblowers, others of whom accurately identified the planned war as a crime that would endanger rather than protect, but stayed in their jobs when the war was launched.

Chilcot makes clear that the attack on Iraq was illegal, against the British public, against the international community and the UN Charter, expected to increase terrorism, based on lies about terrorism and weapons, and — like every other war ever launched — not a last resort. Chilcot records, as reality-based reporting always has, that Iraq claimed honestly to have no nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons. Chilcot fails to explain with any clarity that one cannot legally or morally attack another nation even when it does have such things.

Chilcot does make clear the extent to which France was pushing back against war, along with Russia and Germany and Chile and China. The key supporter of U.S. war plans was the UK, and there is some possibility that a UK refusal to join in this crime might really have done some good.

But Chilcot steers away from criminal responsibility, and from the damage done by the crime. It avoids the Downing Street Memo, the White House Memo, Hussein Kamel, the spying and threatening and bribing involved in the failed effort to win UN authorization, Aznar’s account of Bush’s admission that Saddam Hussein was willing to leave, etc. This is a report that aims for politeness and tranquility.

Not to worry, Chilcot tells us, as nothing like this will happen again even if we just let the criminals walk. Chilcot claims bizarrely that every other war before and since has been defensive and in response to some attack, rather than an act of aggression like this one. Of course, no list of those other wars is provided.

Even more bizarrely, Chilcot claims that Blair and gang literally never considered the possibility that Iraq had no “weapons of mass destruction.” How you make all kinds of assertions, contrary to your evidence, that Iraq has weapons without considering the question is beyond me. But Chilcot credits with great significance the supposedly excusing grace of groupthink and the passion with which people like Blair supposedly believed their own lies. Chilcot even feeds into the disgusting lie that Blair pushes to this day that Iraqis chose to destroy their own country while their occupiers nobly attempted “reconstruction.”

Despite itself, however, Chilcot may do some good. In the United States, when James Comey describes crimes by Hillary Clinton and assures us they should not be prosecuted, most people can be counted on to lie back and accept that blindly or even fervently. Yet our friends in Britain appear less than eager to accept the attitude with which Chilcot has reported on the supreme international crime.

Tony Blair may now be impeached as he needs to be. Yes — sigh — one can and should impeach people no longer in office, as has been usefully done in both British and U.S. history. Removal from office is one penalty that sometimes follows a conviction at a trial following an impeachment; it is not itself the definition of impeachment. Blair should be tried and convicted by Parliament. He should also be put on trial by the International Criminal Court or, better, by a special tribunal established for Iraq as for World War II or Yugoslavia.

The victors in World War II used the Kellogg-Briand Pact to prosecute the losers for the new crime of launching a war. Blair violated both the Kellogg-Briand Pact and the newer, yet never used, United Nations Charter, which also bans war. While Kellogg-Briand allows no exceptions, the exceptions in the UN Charter were famously not met in the case of the war on Iraq or, for that matter, any other recent western wars.

You can sign a petition urging Blair’s impeachment and prosecution here. Of course the goal must be to build momentum for holding the chief (U.S.) war criminals accountable, pursuing truth and reconciliation, and making massive reparations to the people of Iraq and their region. What the U.S. needs is action, not a 7-year “investigation.” Our own Chilcot report, better in fact, was written long ago.

The Chilcot report could, against its own wishes, move us in that direction.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Unfortunately the petition in the link is misworded – technically, it merely expresses an opinion. The Parliamentary motion from 2004 was carefully worded and ruled in order by the Speaker, can I suggest you use that with additional references to Chilcot?

  • Sarastro92

    Together, these documents should be called the “Chilcot-Comey Criminal Enabling Act”.

    the Iraq invasion WAS a success… because the goal was the utter
    destruction of Iraq as a sovereign nation… the same is true of Libya,
    Syria, Afghanistan and Yemen.

    These actions (plus the Kiev Coup) are spelled out under several overarching US doctrines: the Wolfowitz
    Doctrine, the 2002 National Security Doctrine/ Bush Doctrine, the
    Brzezinski Arc of Crisis/ Global Chessboard and , Operation Clean Break.
    All of these Doctrines outline a program of unilateral preemptive war
    solely on the grounds of obliterating potential rivals or blocs of
    rivals who could inhibit securing absolute US hegemony. Destruction
    whole nations and regions is absolutely fair game.

    And so the utter decimation of Iraq and a half-dozen other nations is a successful
    implementation of the the post- Cold War US Strategic and Security
    Doctrines… Iraq was not a “mistake” where we need to search for
    “lessons learned” … Operation Desert Storm and all the subsequent
    decimation of the entire Middle East were always intended to unwind the
    way they did, including the associated terror.

  • United States bombings of other countries

    It is a scandal in contemporary international law, don’t forget, that while “wanton destruction of towns, cities and villages” is a war crime of long standing, the bombing of cities from airplanes goes not only unpunished but virtually un-accused. A terrorist is someone who has a bomb but doesn’t have an air force.

    Notes: The Nation, September 26, 1994, p.304

    RFE/RL Newsline, April 9, 2003 (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty is a “private” international communications service in Europe and Asia funded by the US government.)

    Washington Post, January 1, 2003; Australian Broadcasting Company, January 1, 2003; Agence France Presse, September 19, 2003

    Associated Press, “France Confirms It Denied U.S. Jets Air Space, Says Embassy Damaged”, April 15, 1986

    U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century, “New World Coming” (Phase I Report), September 15, 1999, p.3

    Journal of the American Medical Association, August 25, 1999, p.761

    This is a chapter from Rogue State: A Guide to the World’s Only Superpower by William Blum.

  • February 22, 2016 Iraq: US, UK Fabricated WMD Threat – Created the Reality

    Things come apart so easily when they have been held together with lies. (Dorothy Allison, b. 1949.)

    On 7th September 2002, speaking at a Press Conference flanked by Prime Minister, Tony “dodgy dossier” Blair, President George W. Bush stated that Saddam Hussein was just six months away from an Iraqi nuclear age. (1) The timeline, said Bush, had come from the International Atomic Energy Agency Report issued that morning. Footnote: Extensive inquiries have so far failed to confirm whether an inventory of what went missing from Tuwaitha and other sites from the abandoned nuclear programme, was undertaken, or whether there were efforts to follow up on the ills from the affected areas or attempts to clean them. Inquiries will continue.


  • WMD LIES – Bush Cheney Rumsfeld – THE ULTIMATE CLIP

    Who buys this stuff? 99% of America doesn’t pay attention to the news enough to know our politicians are akin to actors and actresses. Only they’re not very good at it. They just depend on you not paying attention. So pay attention!

  • Zampas

    Tony Blair must be laughing while reading articles lke the one posted on this site, simply because all of them are CONTROLLED OPPOSITION… meaning nothing will be accomplished, it is just a little bit of whining for the day.

    • Nexusfast123

      You are right as its the mainstream media that creates and owns the narrative. He could have murdered the whole Iraqi nation and nothing would happen to him. If they bring charges against Blair they would be bringing them to everyone associated with him.

  • Jul 6, 2016 Jeremy Corbyn – Response to the Chilcot Inquiry report

    This is the entire speech I just gave to the House of Commons in response to the Chilcot Inquiry report into the Iraq war.