<p><pre><code> On 28 July, Mr Blair wrote to President Bush with an
assurance that he would be with him “whatever”
[...]
At the end of January, Mr Blair accepted the US timetable
for military action by mid-March.
[...]
As late as 17 March, Mr Blair was being advised by the
Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee that Iraq
possessed chemical and biological weapons, the means to
deliver them and the capacity to produce them.
</code></pre>
Seems to me the lesson here is: If you decide to invade first, then later you invite your intelligence agencies to "get with the program, jump on the team and come on in for the big win" when it's clear what you want them to tell you, they'll tell you that.<p>Trying to shift blame to them after things went badly seems like scapegoating to me.<p>I mean, that's like going to a car dealership and asking the salesman if his cars are reliable. There's no point in even asking, because you already know he'll say yes regardless of the truth.
The full report is actually here, all 58 sections of it:<p><a href="http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/the-report/" rel="nofollow">http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/the-report/</a><p>The link above is just Chilcot's press statement which was read out on air this morning.<p>If you were to print it out the whole report, all twelve volumes, it looks like this:<p><a href="http://imgur.com/zRHDZyE" rel="nofollow">http://imgur.com/zRHDZyE</a><p>edit: ok, for the avoidance of doubt, there are multiple copies of the same volume in each stack, this was the pile made available to journalists so they could grab a copy of each volume.
I merged the whole thing into a single PDF:<p><a href="http://ohuiginn.net/docs/chilcot/chilcot_report.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://ohuiginn.net/docs/chilcot/chilcot_report.pdf</a><p>6417 pages -- enjoy!
@iocounu made a poem about it on Twitter: <a href="https://mobile.twitter.com/iucounu/status/750456730472091648" rel="nofollow">https://mobile.twitter.com/iucounu/status/750456730472091648</a>
The Guardian - Key points from the Iraq inquiry:<p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/06/iraq-inquiry-key-points-from-the-chilcot-report" rel="nofollow">https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/06/iraq-inquiry...</a>
After killing a President, starting a new war and killing thousands in a decade, the report says, <i>Umm it was all wrong</i>. Earlier Blair had said sorry<p>I wonder whether West could give same options to the likes of Osama, Qaddafi, Aiman AlZaharvi or this <i>luxury</i> only available for non-Muslims only?
Is there anything to stop the UK government censoring this report? I pose the question after it was delayed for publication by the government last year for after the general election. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EJK8K0ypl4" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EJK8K0ypl4</a><p>It would take seven years to publish and would not seem conspiratory to suggest the delays have helped reduce public attention / demand for the report.<p>Would it be possible to gag order certain reports or use governmental powers to achieve this?
While I agree with the substance of conclusions in the report, the media's coverage of it -- as well as how it's been publicly discussed by current and former (non-Blair) members of the UK government -- seems to add up to an effort to take a pound of flesh off of Blair in some kind of weirdly tribalistic cathartic exercise for progressives.
Waste of money (£10million)!<p>Chaos in the Middle east is great for any country who wants to suck its resources cheaply without having to be hold ransom for it by a dictator. "interest of the country" has cost 160,000 lives in Iraq, none gives a shit because the future of black gold is secured until the next invasion<p>I'm a massive hypocrite, I'm about to fill up my car with the exact same oil and go for a pointless journey.