BUSH-BLAIR PRE-WAR MEMO EXPOSED
DIVIDING THE SPOILS:
Tony Blair and George Bush Jr. chopped up a map of Iraq
after deciding which oil-rich portions they and a few other
countries would get. But the thing is, this was long before
their fake war was even declared. Oops!
(CNS) - - Spotlighted this week is the leaking of a shocking 2003 meeting between President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair regarding Iraq, and the meeting's resulting "secret" memo (not anymore).
According to a New York Times article published yesterday, the confab covered in the Blair-Bush memo took place on January 31, 2003 in the White House, and shows that the Bush administration had already decided on the US invasion of Iraq at that point. The memo was transcribed by Blair's chief foreign adviser at the time, David Manning, who participated at the meeting.
It also depicts Bush and Blair cutting a secret deal wherein a full military invasion would be given the green light, regardless of whether or not weapons of mass destruction were discovered by UN weapons inspectors. This of course was in direct contradiction with statements Blair made to Parliament afterwards, promising that Iraq's Saddam Hussein would be given a final chance to disarm.
In the memo, Bush is paraphrased as saying, "The start date for the military campaign was now pencilled in for 10 March. This was when the bombing would begin." Bush told Blair that he thought it "unlikely that there would be internecine warfare between the different religious and ethnic groups" in Iraq after the war.
Five pages long and classified as extremely sensitive, the existence of the memo was first alleged by Philippe Sands in his book Lawless World. It was then obtained by the Times, who confirmed its authenticity.
UK Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell said, regarding the startling memo, "If these allegations are accurate, the Prime Minister and President Bush were determined to go to war with or without a second UN resolution, and Britain was signed up to do so by the end of January 2003."
Well, according to the Times, the allegations indeed are correct.