US, UK held secret Iraq war talks months before previously thought

United States and Britain held secret war talks with U.S. general 11 months before Iraq invasion

America’s most senior general flew into Britain for top secret talks on the invasion of Iraq 11 months before the attack on Saddam Hussein’s regime.

Details of the classified meeting, held at RAF Brize Norton, Oxfordshire, suggest Tony Blair’s Government was involved in detailed discussions about toppling the Iraqi dictator earlier than previously disclosed.

American General Tommy Franks flew in to the base in April 2002 to attend a summit meeting called by the then Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon.

It followed similar meetings Gen Franks had in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

Secret Pentagon documents reveal Mr Hoon asked about ‘US plans for Iraq’.

Exactly what was said has been censored, but declassified sections of the documents show Gen Franks had a separate meeting with Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, then Britain’s chief of defence staff, and senior officers.

At that meeting, ‘regional issues’ including Iraq were discussed, and Gen Franks was told the Ministry of Defence had ‘put together a small cell’ for ‘thinking strategically about Iraq’ and ‘what courses of action are available to handle the regime’.

Mr Hoon did not mention the meeting when he gave evidence to the Chilcot Inquiry on Iraq earlier this year. And Admiral Boyce, now Lord Boyce, told the Chilcot panel he had set up an Iraq planning group, but only in May 2002.

Last night Mr Hoon said: ‘I do recall meeting [Gen Franks] at Brize Norton but I am pretty confident that the primary purpose was to discuss Afghanistan.

‘Whether in the course of that meeting there were discussions about Iraq wouldn’t entirely surprise me, but I am confident that there wasn’t anything more specific other than questions like, “What’s going on?”  ’

He added that he did not ‘hide or disguise meetings’ from Chilcot, saying he volunteered as much information as he could recall.

Researcher Chris Ames, who helped secure the documents’ release under Freedom of Information laws, said: ‘The memo contradicts the evidence of other Chilcot witnesses, who said British collaboration with US war plans did not begin until the early summer of 2002.’

//DAILY MAIL

Families of Iraq war dead voice anger at ‘smirking’ Blair

Former prime minister accused of ‘not facing up to facts’ as he gives evidence to Chilcot inquiry

The families of British military personnel killed in Iraq condemned Tony Blair’s performance before the Chilcot inquiry today, accusing him of being disrespectful.

One, Theresea Evans, asked the former prime minister to look her in the eye and say sorry for the loss of her son.

Evans, from Llandudno, North Wales – whose 24-year-old son, Llywelyn, died in a Chinook helicopter crash in 2003 – said: “I would simply like Tony Blair to look me in the eye and say he was sorry. Instead, he is in there smirking.”

Anne Donnachie, from Reading, Berkshire, whose 18-year-old son, Paul, was killed by a sniper in 2006, said she blamed Blair for his death.

“From what I have heard this morning, he is just denying everything,” she said. “He will just not face up to the facts. I believe he made a massive mistake when he sent my son to Iraq.”

Sarah Chapman, from Cambridge, whose brother, Sergeant Bob O’Connor, died five years ago, said it would be better if Blair was facing the families rather than sitting with his back to them as witnesses are required to do.

“He is being very adamant about his views, as we expected, but it is clear he did not share all the papers before the invasion with the rest of his cabinet,” she said.

“I am disgusted by that. It is obvious he acted alone.”

Anti-war protesters outside the inquiry were denied a chance to direct their chants at the former prime minister in person when he used a side entrance to make his way into the inquiry.

When he began giving evidence inside the QEII Centre in Westminster, a building fortified with steel barriers and lines of police, campaigners stopped their chants of “war criminal”, turned their backs and began listening as the names of civilians and military personnel killed in the conflict were read out.

The crowds dissipated at the end of the morning, but numbers were expected to build again towards the end of the afternoon when the session ends and Blair leaves the inquiry.

For many, today will be the last in a line of protests against the Iraq war which began when up to two million people took to the streets to march against the invasion almost seven years ago.

“He [Blair] does not have the integrity to come and face the people,” Lindsey German, the convener of the Stop the War Coalition, said. “Sliding in by a back door entrance is typical of his lies, deceit and evasion.”

Continue reading: THE GUARDIAN

Former British leader Tony Blair to teach at Yale

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair will teach at Yale University in the next academic year starting in September, leading a course on “faith and globalization,” the Ivy League school said on Friday.

Yale, the alma mater of U.S. President George W. Bush, said Blair had been appointed Howland Distinguished Fellow, a post that dates to 1915 and which has been occupied by such notable individuals as former Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and journalist Sir Alistair Cooke.

Blair, a part-time international envoy for Palestinian economic development since he stepped down last year, will also participate in other events at the New Haven, Connecticut, campus, where he will teach the half-year course, Yale said.

He also plans to set up the Blair Faith Foundation, based in London, before taking up his teaching post, the university said.

The foundation aims to examine the role of religion in the modern world and to promote understanding among Christianity, Judaism and Islam.

“As the world continues to become increasingly inter-dependent, it is essential that we explore how religious values can be channeled toward reconciliation rather than polarization,” Yale President Richard Levin said.

“Mr. Blair has demonstrated outstanding leadership in these areas and is especially qualified to bring his perspective to bear,” he added in a statement.

-Blair, 54, became leader of Britain’s Labour Party in 1994. Three years later he became prime minister and remained in that role before stepping down last year.

-Yale is the third-oldest institution of higher education in the United States and is a member of the Ivy League.

//yahoo-reuters//

Former British PM Blair takes part time position at JPMorgan for $980,000/yr

LONDON (Reuters) – Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair stepped into the private sector on Thursday, joining U.S. bank JPMorgan Chase and Co Inc as a senior adviser to its board and clients.

The bank said Blair, who is working as a Middle East peace envoy for the European Union, Russia, the United Nations and the United States, would advise its chief executive and senior management team on global politics on a part-time basis.

He would also take part in company events with key clients — with his name and contact seen by some as a major draw.

Blair biographer Anthony Seldon said there would inevitably be allegations he was selling out, but that ultimately his new job was likely to come second to his global political work.

“Maybe this is a harbinger of a new Tony Blair,” he told Reuters. “But he has never struck me as someone who enjoys particularly the trappings of wealth except foreign holidays with his children.”

“I don’t think this will be nearly as important to him as his other priorities such as the inter-faith dialogue work and the Middle East,” he added.

Seldon said Blair had immersed himself in international affairs probably more than any other European politician and was therefore a very high-profile global name for such a job.

BETTER THAN BUSH?

“He is about as good as it gets,” he said, contrasting Blair with the U.S. president whom he said was seen as a less lucrative brand once he leaves office. “Most firms would rather have George W. Bush advising their competition.”

Blair said of his new job with JPMorgan: “I look forward to advising them on how they approach the huge political and economic changes that globalization brings.”

London’s Evening Standard newspaper said the role was rumored to be worth 500,000 pounds ($980,000) a year, and contrasted his wealth with the hardship of soldiers wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan — both wars begun under Blair — who have struggled for compensation.

JPMorgan refused to comment on Blair’s pay deal.

The Financial Times, which first reported the move on its Web Site, said the job was the first of a series that Blair — who stood down last year after a decade in office — intended to take in the private sector.

Blair is credited with bringing his Labor Party out of years in opposition to win a landslide election in 1997, but his popularity was damaged in Britain by the Iraq war and his staunch support for Bush.

“I have always been interested in commerce and the impact of globalization,” Blair told the Financial Times.

Former prime ministers have often relied on private sector work or lucrative public speaking fees — particularly in the United States — after leaving office, but some analysts were unfazed by Blair’s move.

“When I come to look at my earnings estimates for JPMorgan I certainly wouldn’t be making an adjustment for the Tony Blair factor,” said Richard Staite, banking analyst for Atlantic Equities in London. “It is a pretty marginal issue.”

via//Reuters

Believe It or Not in the Middle East

40 Years of Lies

Believe It or Not in the Middle East

By ROBERT FISK

When I was a schoolboy, I loved a column which regularly appeared in British papers called “Ripley’s Believe It or Not!”. In a single rectangular box filled with naively drawn illustrations, Ripley – Bob Ripley – would try to astonish his readers with amazing facts:

“Believe It or Not, in California, an entire museum is dedicated to candy dispensers … Believe It or Not, a County Kerry man possesses an orange that is 25 years old … Believe It or Not, a weather researcher had his ashes scattered on the eve of Huricane Danielle 400 miles off the coast of Miama, Florida.” Etc, etc, etc.

Incredibly, Ripley’s column lives on, and there is even a collection of “Ripley Believe It or Not” museums in the United States.

The problem, of course, is that these are all extraordinary facts which will not offend anyone. There are no suicide bombers in Ripley, no Israeli air strikes (“Believe It or Not, 17,000 Lebanese and Palestinians, most of them civilians, were killed in Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon”), no major casualty tolls (“Believe It or Not, up to 650,000 Iraqis died in the four years following the 2003 Anglo-American invasion of Iraq”). See what I mean? Just a bit too close to the bone (or bones).

But I was reminded of dear old Ripley when I was prowling through the articles marking the anniversary of the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. Memoirs there have been aplenty, but I think only the French press – in the shape of Le Monde Diplomatique – was prepared to confront a bit of “Believe It or Not”.

It recalled vividly – and shamefully – how the world’s newspapers covered the story of Egypt’s “aggression” against Israel. In reality – Believe It or Not – it was Israel which attacked Egypt after Nasser closed the straits of Tiran and ordered UN troops out of Sinai and Gaza following his vituperative threats to destroy Israel. “The Egyptians attack Israel,” France-Soir told its readers on 5 June 1967, a whopper so big that it later amended its headline to “It’s Middle East War!”.

Quite so. Next day, the socialist Le Populaire headlined its story “Attacked on all sides, Israel resists victoriously”. On the same day, Le Figaro carried an article announcing that “the victory of the army of David is one of the greatest of all time”. Believe It or Not, the Second World War – which might be counted one of the greatest of all time, had ended only 22 years earlier.

Johnny Hallyday, France’s undie-able pop star, sang for 50,000 French supporters of Israel – for whom solidarity was expressed in the French press by Serge Gainsbourg, Juliette GrÈco, Yves Montand, Simone Signoret, ValÈry Giscard d’Estaing and FranÁois Mitterand. Believe It or Not – and you can believe it – Mitterand once received the coveted Francisque medal from PÈtain’s Vichy collaborationists.

Only the president of France, General de Gaulle, moved into political isolation by telling a press conference several months later that Israel “is organising, on the territories which it has taken, an occupation which cannot work without oppression, repression and expulsions – and if there appears resistance to this, it will in turn be called ‘terrorism’”. This accurate prophecy earned reproof from the Nouvel Observateur – to the effect that “Gaullist France has no friends; it has only interests”. And Believe It or Not, with the exception of one small Christian paper, there was in the entire French press one missing word: Palestinians.

I owe it to the academic Anicet MobÈ Fansiama to remind me this week that – Believe It or Not – Congolese troops from Belgium’s immensely wealthy African colony scored enormous victories over Italian troops in Africa during the Second World War, capturing 15,000 prisoners, including nine generals. Called “the Public Force” – a name which happily excluded the fact that these heroes were black Congolese – the army mobilised 13,000 soldiers and civilians to fight Vichy French colonies in Africa and deployed in the Middle East – where they were positioned to defend Palestine – as well as in Somalia, Madagascar, India and Burma.

Vast numbers of British and American troops passed through the Congo as its wealth was transferred to the war chests of the United States and Britain.

A US base was built at Kinshasa to move oil to Allied troops fighting in the Middle East.

But – Believe It or Not – when Congolese trade unions, whose members were requisitioned to perform hard labour inside Belgium’s colony by carrying agricultural and industrial goods and military equipment, often on their backs, demanded higher salaries, the Belgian authorities confronted their demonstrations with rifle fire, shooting down 50 of their men.

At least 3,000 political prisoners were deported for hard labour to a remote district of Congo. Thus were those who gave their blood for Allied victory repaid. Or rather not repaid. The four billion Belgian francs which was owed back to the Congo – about £500m in today’s money – was never handed over. Believe It or Not.

So let’s relax and return to Ripley reality. “Believe It or Not, Russell Parsons of Hurricane, West Virginia, has his funeral and cremation instructions tattooed on his arm! … Believe It or Not, in April 2007 (yes, these are new Ripleys) a group of animal lovers paid nearly $3,400 to buy 300 lobsters from a Maine fish market – then set them free back into the ocean! … Believe It or Not, in a hospital waiting room, 70 per cent of people suffer from broken bones, 75 per cent are fatigued, 80 per cent have fevers. What percentage of people must have all four ailments?” Believe It or Not, I don’t know. And oh yes, “Geta, Emperor of Rome AD189-212, insisted upon alternative meals. A typical menu: partridge (perdix), peacock (pavo), leek (porrum), beans (phaseoli), peach (persica), plum (pruna) and melon (pepone).”

I guess after that, you just have to throw up.

Robert Fisk is a reporter for The Independent and author of Pity the Nation. He is also a contributor to CounterPunch’s collection, The Politics of Anti-Semitism. Fisk’s new book is The Conquest of the Middle East.

Source: CounterPunch
http://www.counterpunch.com/fisk06092007.html

Colbert: Tony Blair’s True Legacy

Adieu, Blair, Adieu

Bush’s Zombie Shuffles Off Stage

Adieu, Blair, Adieu

By TARIQ ALI

Tony Blair’s success was limited to winning three general elections in a row. A second-rate actor, he turned out to be a crafty and avaricious politician, but without much substance; bereft of ideas he eagerly grasped and tried to improve upon the legacy of Margaret Thatcher. But though in many ways Blair’s programme has been a euphemistic, if bloodier, version of Thatcher’s, the style of their departures is very different. Thatcher’s overthrow by her fellow-Conservatives was a matter of high drama: an announcement outside the Louvre’s glass pyramid during the Paris Congress brokering the end of the Cold War; tears; a crowded House of Commons. Blair makes his unwilling exit against a backdrop of car-bombs and mass carnage in Iraq, with hundreds of thousands left dead or maimed from his policies, and London a prime target for terrorist attack. Thatcher’s supporters described themselves afterwards as horror-struck by what they had done. Even Blair’s greatest sycophants in the British media: Martin Kettle and Michael White (The Guardian), Andrew Rawnsley (Observer), Philip Stephens (FT) confess to a sense of relief as he finally quits.

A true creature of the Washington Consensus, Blair was always loyal to the various occupants of the White House. In Europe, he preferred Aznar to Zapatero, Merckel to Schroeder, was seriously impressed by to Berlusconi and, most recently, made no secret of his desire that Sarkozy was his candidate in France. He understood that privatisation/deregulation at home were part of the same mechanism as the wars abroad. If this judgement seems unduly harsh let me quote Sir Rodric Braithwaite, a former senior adviser to Blair, writing in the Financial Times on 2, August, 2006:

“A spectre is stalking British television, a frayed and waxy zombie straight from Madame Tussaud’s. This one, unusually, seems to live and breathe. Perhaps it comes from the Central Intelligence Agency’s box of technical tricks, programmed to spout the language of the White House in an artificial English accent…

Mr Blair has done more damage to British interests in the Middle East than Anthony Eden, who led the UK to disaster in Suez 50 years ago. In the past 100 years–to take the highlights–we have bombed and occupied Egypt and Iraq, put down an Arab uprising in Palestine and overthrown governments in Iran, Iraq and the Gulf. We can no longer do these things on our own, so we do them with the Americans. Mr Blair’s total identification with the White House has destroyed his influence in Washington, Europe and the Middle East itself: who bothers with the monkey if he can go straight to the organ-grinder?…”

This, too, is mild compared to what is said about Blair in the British Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence. Senior diplomats have told me on more than one occasion that it would not upset them too much if Blair were to be tried as a war criminal. More cultured critics sometimes compare him to the Cavaliere Cipolia, the vile hypnotist of fascist Italy, so brilliantly portrayed in Thomas Mann’s 1929 novel ‘Mario and the Magician’. Blair is certainly not Mussolini, but like the Duce he enjoyed to simultaneously lead and humiliate his supporters.

What much of this reveals is anger and impotence. There is no mechanism to get rid of a sitting Prime Minister unless his or her party loses confidence. The Conservative leadership decided that Thatcher simply had to go because of her negative attitude to Europe. Labour tends to be more sentimental towards its leaders and in this case they owed so much to Blair that nobody close to him wants to be cast in the role of Brutus. In the end he decided to go himself. The disaster in Iraq had made him a much hated politician and slowly support began to ebb. One reason for the slowness was that the country is without a serious opposition. In Parliament, the Conservatives simply followed Blair. The Liberal-Democrats were ineffective. Blair had summed up Britain’s attitude to Europe at Nice in 2000:

“It is possible, in our judgement, to fight Britain’s corner, get the best out of Europe for Britain and exercise real authority and influence in Europe. That is as it should be. Britain is a world power.”

This grotesque, self-serving fantasy that ‘Britain is a world power’ is to justify that it will always be EU/UK. The real union is with Washington. France and Germany are seen as rivals for Washington’s affections, not potential allies in an independent EU. The French decision to re-integrate themselves into NATO and pose as the most vigorous US ally was a serious structural shift which weakened Europe. Britain responded by encouraging a fragmented political order in Europe through expansion and insisted on a permanent US presence on the continent.

Blair’s half-anointed, half-hated successor, Gordon Brown, is far more intelligent (he reads books) but politically no different. There might be a change of tone, but little else. It is a grim prospect with or without Blair and an alternative politics (anti-war, anti-Trident, defence of public services) is confined to the nationalist parties in Scotland and Wales. Its absence nationally fuels the anger felt by substantial sections of the population, reflected in voting (or not) against those in power.

Tariq Ali’s new book, Pirates of the Caribbean: Axis of Hope, is published by Verso. He can be reached at: tariq.ali3@btinternet.com

Source: CounterPunch
http://www.counterpunch.com/tariq05102007.html