Questions For Blair
 
Blair's office had a copy of the Butler report 24 hours before it was released to the press, so they were not surprisingly ready to put a good spin on it before the press even had a chance to read it. The lazy press, pushed for deadlines, took the bait as usual and it is only today that some more detailed concerns are starting to appear.
 
1. While the Butler Report was certainly a whitewash, it questions Blair's informal "sofa-based" style of government where no records are kept and decisions are made without widespread consultation. This has long been a criticism from with Blair's own Labour party.
 
The Scotsman reports that "Ministers were merely given oral briefings; they were not allowed to see background papers. There was no proper discussion in Cabinet or in Cabinet committees. In effect, it was made clear to ministers that if the PM wanted their opinion, he would tell them what it was. The decisions to go to war were taken on Tony Blair’s sofa . . ."
 
2. The 45-minute claim is once again exposed as an inexcusable misunderstanding because it related to Saddam's capability to deploy chemical weapons on the ground (e.g. against Kurds) rather than launch a nuclear attack or international WMD offensive (as it was portrayed).
 
3. Lord Butler also renewed doubts about the entire legality of the Iraq war when he questioned an assertion by Downing Street - days before the invasion - that Saddam Hussein was in breach of a UN Security Council resolution. As the SMH reports:
 
"the Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith, demanded a categorical assurance from No. 10 that Iraq was in breach of Security Council resolution 1441 of November 2002. He demanded "hard evidence of non-compliance and non-co-operation" with resolution 1441 after Britain and the US had failed to secure a second UN resolution.
Mr Blair's private secretary offered Lord Goldsmith this assurance in a letter on March 15: "It is indeed the Prime Minister's unequivocal view that Iraq is in further material breach of its obligations, as in operative paragraph four of UNSCR 1441, because of 'false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq to comply with, and co-operate fully in the implementation of, this resolution'."
 
Blair says he takes "full responsibility" but what does that actually mean?
 
As one backbencher complained, "Thousands and thousands of lives have gone. I think he's in denial. The buck stops with Tony."
 
Robin Cook points out that the report exposes "the most embarrassing failure in the history of British intelligence" and yet "no one is to blame".
 
The Opposition Leader, Michael Howard, asks "If he said that in his judgement war was necessary, would the country trust him? ... The question Mr Blair must ask himself is: Does he have any credibility left?"
 
The answer, obviously, is NO. Blair must resign immediately.