It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


POLITICS: Secret Documents Reveal Blair's War Plans 8 Months Before Iraq Invasion

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 2 2005 @ 02:32 PM
Secret minutes from a July 2002 Downing Street meeting leaked to the UK Sunday Times reveal the Labour government's private commitment to the Iraq invasion, that the WMD case was thin, and that the government intended to use schemes to lure Saddam Hussein into providing legal justification. The documents also reveal that in the U.S. the "intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy".
The Downing Street minutes, headed “Secret and strictly personal — UK eyes only”, detail one of the most important meetings ahead of the invasion. It was chaired by the prime minister and attended by his inner circle. The document reveals Blair backed “regime change” by force from the outset, despite warnings from Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, that such action could be illegal.

The political strategy proved to be arguing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) posed such a threat that military action had to be taken. However, at the July meeting Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, said the case for war was “thin” as “Saddam was not threatening his neighbours and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran”.

Straw suggested they should “work up” an ultimatum about weapons inspectors that would “help with the legal justification”. Blair is recorded as saying that “it would make a big difference politically and legally if Saddam refused to allow in the UN inspectors”.

A separate secret briefing for the meeting said Britain and America had to “create” conditions to justify a war.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

The Secret Downing Street Minutes.html

This will be a major blow for the Labour government's re-election hopes with the UK elections just days away. Perhaps this memo was leaked earlier yet was withheld and only recently released for the best timing in relation to the elections. Regardless, the document not only shows the Blair government's commitment to the Iraq invasion and the determination to manipulate events to facilitate such, it also provides testimony that, in Washington, intelligence and facts were being fixed around a premeditated invasion policy.

Something tells me that Bush and Blair know a lot more about the truth of "peak oil" than we do.

Related News Links:

[edit on 2005/5/2 by wecomeinpeace]

posted on May, 2 2005 @ 02:36 PM
Amazing news. Looks like Blair is about to lose an election.

The proof of the crime has arisen, now what were the motives? Is this about Peak Oil? Why else would we need to break so many laws to bring baseball, hot dogs, and fish and chips to the Middle East?


[edit on 2-5-2005 by Zipdot]

posted on May, 2 2005 @ 03:01 PM
Just goes to show that no matter what, the truth will always eventually come out. Unfortunately, this will simply be brushed aside as all the previous revelations have. Our desperate clinging to the illusion that our leaders are infallible angels will be our destruction. Doom, gloom, etc, etc... does anybody really care anymore?

Remember Dr. Kelly?

...Katharine Gun?

[edit on 2005/5/2 by wecomeinpeace]

posted on May, 2 2005 @ 03:28 PM
...The Alamo?

Sorry, had to.

(Awaits the First Titor.)


posted on May, 2 2005 @ 04:11 PM
Hmm.... seems like a election timed piece of re-hashing by the Times to me. This story first came out on BBC's Panorama on March 20th. The Times even reported on it then:

So why are they repeating it now?

Not to take away from the seriousness of the story, but everyone knows the Times is a Tory paper...

EDIT: Okay, I'm not paying attention.
Other papers are reporting it too, but there doesn't seem much difference to this and what came out in Panorama.

[edit on 2-5-2005 by kegs]

posted on May, 2 2005 @ 05:05 PM
Not much comment about how this implicates BushCo if both governments worked together to fabricate a reason to attack Iraq.. How can ANY government get away with stuff like this? Are we just too apathetic to care anymore? Is it the chemtrails?

posted on May, 2 2005 @ 05:08 PM

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
Not much comment about how this implicates BushCo if both governments worked together to fabricate a reason to attack Iraq.. How can ANY government get away with stuff like this? Are we just too apathetic to care anymore? Is it the chemtrails?

Well, not all things center about the US government. This is pretty damning to the Labour party, if you ask me, but somehow...there's always a way to spin out of it...THAT's true the world over.

posted on May, 3 2005 @ 02:26 AM
With reference to the Downing street memo

There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

i.e. the US was going into Iraq anyway with all the dreadful consequences that that would have had if they went alone without any UN involvement at all. The arab world would have gone ape-# and Bin Laden would have had an unbelievable number of recruits.

(conclusion) (a) We should work on the assumption that the UK would take part in any military action. But we needed a fuller picture of US planning before we could take any firm decisions.

i.e. military action was not definite as some anti Blair people are saying.

(conclusion) (f) We must not ignore the legal issues: the Attorney-General would consider legal advice with FCO/MOD legal advisers

i.e. illegal military action was not an option although again the anti Blair folks are always accusing him of this (and have clearly never read the Attorney Generals discussion document clearly addressed to the Prime Minister only on the 7th March)

Blair defused the situation by going making the US go through the UN which the NSC didn't want to do. However, it meant that the UK had to sit side by side with the US hence why Blair needed legal justification which he quite clearly was pursuing.

Britain with all its US bases and US companies is far safer place today than it would have been had the US gone into Iraq alone with no UN resolution 1441. Wake up folks and think about it !

posted on May, 3 2005 @ 03:49 AM
Is there really a treaty that states "If the president of the USA says we are going to war then the UK automatically goes to war with them suposedly signed by maggie thatcher in the reagan years. 83' I think???

Do you really think labour are going to loose the election, think again. They got all sorts of tricks.

Why can you not see this, GW Bush won his election twice in a row even though most people wanted this tyrant out. C'mon now I bet this election has been setup since the last bilderberg meeting.

The labour party, the con artists, the lib dumbs are basically one in the same 3 groups to make you believe your in control when in actual fact your not. The only people with real influential power are The bank of England, The world bank, The bank of america the federal reserve etc. etc.

This is why no one questions David kelly's death, depleted uranium mis-use (using up stockpiles) etc. etc.

Puh'lease of course this "war" in iraq was planned maybe even a year before it happened. I guess even more so as I heard a rumor that 5 years before iraq happened Russia and france suposedly had first dibs on the oil in iraq if the UN sanctions were lifted from saddam. Unconfirmed

In the UK, Murdoch owns the Times and the Sun and lord Black the Daily Telegraph.
Both of them Bilderberg members So were gordon brown and Tony blair before coming into power hmmmmmm.....?????

People do not underestimate our politicians, talking about Tony is a liar of course he bloody is. Mind you most of the British politicians are liars, look what happened when the BBC question the party leaders about lying they virtually choked on their own voice or just avoided the question with BS.

Still its a good attempt to remove Blair but he ain't going nowhere and when he eventually does go it will be Gordon brown in place, everyone knows he wants to be in the big chair.

posted on May, 3 2005 @ 04:23 AM

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
Not much comment about how this implicates BushCo if both governments worked together to fabricate a reason to attack Iraq.. How can ANY government get away with stuff like this? Are we just too apathetic to care anymore? Is it the chemtrails?

I think thats the case I think so many of us realize that the election was stolen not once but twice have almost given up. The only thing that is going to change the country is for the majority of Americans to get out in the streets and protest and I just don't see it happening.
Then there are those idiots who think Bush does no wrong, you know the totally brainwashed ones, if somone got film of him having sex with a 13 year child, the idiots would say, "Isn't it nice he cares so much to be teaching our children about safe sex!" Seriously who ever is in control has done it all right, they got us all struggling just to survive, majority of us are working longer hours for less pay, then the rest are scared to death by the terrorist reference and color code that we are just easily led. I don't understand what has happened but I know I don't like it, but if you don't have a million other people willing to stand up and protest then no one is going to hear or care. Maybe we should talk to the organizers of the million man march on how to organize such a demonstration.

posted on May, 3 2005 @ 04:47 AM

You have voted wecomeinpeace for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

Where is it in the mainstream news over here?!?!

Its not being covered as far as I can see. Bastard

[edit on 3/5/05 by subz]

new topics

top topics


log in