Brown to Announce Iraq War Inquiry

At long last Labour are to announce an Iraq war inquiry. It's thought that it will examine the circumstances leading up to joining the US-led invasion in March 2003 and its aftermath. I hope in light of all the torture allegations, it will also focus on Britain's involvement in them, the thought that the government had no idea people were being tortured for 6 years is ridiculous.

An inquiry wasn't going to be announced until August after all British soldiers left Iraq, yet Brown in an attempt to improve relations with rebel backbenchers and those that opposed the Iraq war has bought it forward. The other factor here is by starting it off Labour get some control over it, if the Tories win the election and start an inquiry they have no need not to be completely open and honest. As it won't be them that revelations will be a problem for.

The inquiry itself is expected to be based on the Franks inquiry. This consisted of six senior privy ­councillors who had full access to government papers but who met in secret.

Two things about that are concerning firstly, who will be the six senior privy ­councillors? Secondly if it's to be held in secret, then what's the point? No one wants more secrets and lies from this government. So I hope the announcement expected this week, will reflect the transparency and reform Labour keep banging on about.

Torture Parliamentary Committee

Craig Murray* has given evidence to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights. He's enforced what we already know, the UK government regularly received intelligence obtained by torture. Both Murray and Philippe Sands who spoke said, the time of which Britain knew about torture is at the heart of whether they were complicit, also brought into question is whether Britain out sourced torture. Murray's statement echoes the information being released in America, disagreement on policy was repressed, and he felt there was "an appetite for false information".

An interesting article by Frank Rich joins the dots of the torture time line, to focus on the British side though. A piece of information to put in context now, is the July 2002 Downing Street Memo, worth noting that July 2002 is the earliest time we know that torture started in America, and "C" is an agent that's briefing Tony Blair:

C reported on his recent talks in Washington. 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.

The Committee are questioning if there should be a bigger investigation, I think it's clear from just what's in the public domain, it's not a case of "if", but there should be an investigation. There were many lies taking place, and we have a right to know what the truth is.

*H/T Blairwatch