Catchy Title

What is the point of an Inquiry?   Surely, it is to inquire of people, to gather pieces of information that you don’t already possess.  To collate together all pieces of evidence in order to produce a well-informed, educated, commentary or judgement relating to a specific set of questions?

Apparently not.  It seems that the BBC, ITV, Sky, The Guardian, The Mail, The Sun, The Mirror, The Star, The Times, all of the protesters, columnists, bloggers, and stay-at-home Blair-haters have all received the MI5/MI6/CIA/FBI/FSB files, all of the Cabinet Minister’s reports, the Civil Service files, the Military dossiers, not to mention the satellite imagery and witness statements from on the ground in Iraq.

I wish I had signed up to receive these too.  I’m guessing that Mr John Chilcott is also feeling a little foolish, as he appears to have missed out on that mailshot also.  He, just like me, is having to wait until people give evidence to find out what happened.  He like me is having to read through published documents to establish the timeline and decision making process that led to the invasion of Iraq.  What fools we are.

But I suspect that I may be wrong.  That there has been no release of information.  My suspicion is that 95% of the media are using nothing more than the court of uninformed public opinion obtained from what I only hope is a very small percentage of ignorant dullards, on which to base their reports of the facts; rather than using the freely available facts themselves.

The Times report of Tony Blair’s appearance in front the Inquiry today was headlined ‘Unrepentant Blair says ‘I’d do it again‘ , followed by the tagline ‘Tony Blair branded a murderer and liar after ending his appearance before Iraq inquiry with a refusal to voice any regrets‘.   What they failed to do was report any of the factual answers to questions.  They did however report about how he ‘felt’ about it all.  It turns out that one person in the audience of the Inquiry was responsible for the ‘murderer and liar’ comment.  Yet reading the headline, my first assumption was that the Inquiry had made that determination.

What they failed to do, and what all media outlets have failed to do is ask us: ‘If you were in Tony Blair’s position, with same facts at your fingertips that Mr Blair had in 2003; would you have made the same decisions?’, and ‘if nothing had been done, and Saddam had refused for the umpteenth time to abide by UN resolutions and inspections, would the world, and would the region be a safer place now’.   The unfortunate reality is that 95% of the population absolutely would have done the same thing, if in the exact same position, and the even more unfortunate reality is that 94% of the population are too ignorant and uninformed to admit it.

The security situation of the entire world dramatically declined on September 11th 2001.  It has got no worse since 2003.  In fact less people have died per year in terrorist attacks around the world since 2004 than in the years 2001-2003.  I for one am happy to see that Iraq is holding it’s own trials and tribunals against those who committed mass atrocities against it’s own citizens and it’s neighbours in the country’s recent history.   These trials are being held in open court, with findings and evidence being published frequently.  This would never have happened under Saddam, and these people would have never seen justice.  They would have continued their life living in palaces, living off the income from the oil fields whilst the workers suffered, and those that were of a different religious order would be raped, tortured and murdered at the whim of a power-hungry fascist elite.

When the ‘war’ first started a majority of the commentators to this post-war world were not standing on the rooftop crying ‘shame! foul!’.  Most of them were with public opinion, which was a sense of ‘something needs to be done, but we’re not entirely convinced that war is the way to go, however Saddam is making a mockery of the UN, and if this works as it should the actual ‘war’ should be over very soon’.  The silent majority were happy to support our troops and see where it went, as were the commentators.   But since the war, the slow and bloody rebuilding effort has caused a sway of ‘I-told-you-so’s’ from the people who in reality told us nothing of the sort.  They created a very hefty bandwagon on which there appeared to be enough room for everyone to jump.

Opinions are useless in all walks of life unless they are informed ones.  Informed by either a collection of accurate facts, or in the absence of facts, a healthy dose of experience in the field, and history of the situation at hand.  The British public and the media have neither.  They were not subject to the briefings, the reports, the intelligence gathering, and back-room talks; let alone the ‘tipped-winks, unnaturally prolonged hand-shakes coupled with a brief stare, and quiet maneuvering’ that has been a part of international diplomacy for thousands of years.  They were not, never will be, and most definitely shouldn’t be aware of all of the information gathered and where that information came from.

So the people that stand outside the QE2 Conference centre holding up the ‘Bliar’ banners, need to sit back for a moment.  They need to think about what information they have that the Chilcot Inquiry don’t. They should come forward and say what meetings they are aware of that contradict Tony Blair’s testimony.  They need to explain to the people that have yet to make up their mind, why they think that Tony Blair is a murderer, why they feel the coalition that went to Iraq had no business being there.   Why only a minority of Iraqi citizens feel the need to move around blowing things up yet the rest seem happy to create life, jobs and government, whilst the protesters share the same sentiment to the ‘war’ as the minority.  They need to explain why they say the only reason we went to war was money and oil,  yet the amount of oil being imported to the UK and the US in 2003-2008 is on average 44% lower than it was in the years up to 2003.  The oil price is not set by the UK or the US, and the income for the oil being extracted in Iraq is shared between the companies extracting it, and the Iraqi government.   The military operation has cost billions, and will continue to cost billions more.   There has been no financial incentive.   The US military is currently using thousands of troops, and many more engineers to upgrade the oil infrastructure in Iraq, and to ensure the security of it’s workers.  They are not getting paid for this task, and the only benefits are to the Iraqi Government, the people of Iraq, and the companies that work there.

Those people I referred to earlier who appeared to already be in possession of information that eludes the rest of us; the protesters, the media etc., they have already made up their minds.  They are baying for blood. Shouting words like ‘Justice! Murderer!’  Some feel that capital punishment should return for Blair and the like. They shout about an open trial by jury, and the ‘inevitable whitewash’ if the Inquiry was to rule ‘no foul’.  Yet how fair could the trial be, if to all of these people, ANY verdict other than ‘Blair is guilty, and the War was unfounded’ is deemed incorrect.  In reality there is already a trial occurring.  There is a panel of several learned men and women, weighing evidence and ‘judging’ the participants.   The only reason that this isn’t good enough for some, is that the panel was undecided on the outcome at the start, is looking to learn things that were unknown to them before, and wish to be fair and open-minded.  The only trial that would suit the placard holders would have to be made up of people who had their opinions of guilt/innocence registered before the commencement of the Inquiry.

The protesters need to get on with their lives, and start helping others.  If they have the time to stand outside buildings shouting outright lies on a weekday, then they have time to go out into the world, learning how it really works, and helping those that truly need help.  They are spiteful, mean-spirited, and two-faced.

As for the media.  A return to factual reporting, allowing the people to make informed decisions, and leaving the bias, the manipulation, and bare-faced hypocrisy behind would benefit society far more than the current model, yet perhaps wouldn’t be so profitable.

I welcome any comments to this blog, and I look forward to debating with those who may hold a different view.

The US is to end its 22-year ban on people with HIV entering the country, President Barack Obama has confirmed.

Originally read on the BBC News site, but it is true, you can read it here, or watch it here.

Mr Obama made the announcement as he extended funding for an act that provides HIV/Aids related health care.

“If we want to be the global leader in combating HIV/Aids, we need to act like it,” Mr Obama said

A bold statement indeed, and one he could only get away with in the early part of his first term as POTUS. Despite America electing a left-wing, black President, that President is sadly not truly representative of the vast majority of Americans.  I can only imagine the media storm that is brewing.  Obama will have this Policy decision played back to him ad-infinitum, through every argument where it serves to paint Obama as a lefty-communist-leaning-gay-hugging son-of-a-bitch in order to frighten Americas grass roots into thinking ‘Well I’ll be! Cleatus, get yo ass in here.  That there Osama basterd wants us all drinking vodka and dancing round with tea-towels on our heads, I’m gonna shoot that n***** mother f****r’.

It is a decision that will be profoundly difficult to sell to the American public, difficult to move on from, and defending it for years to come will take its toll on President Obama.   I am glad to say, it is a decision that makes me proud to be a ‘Westerner’, reaffirms my faith in humanity, and gives me immense hope for the future, you see ladies and gentleman;  Obama just stepped into the ring.