Vocal Voices

.

So it drags on, and this from the most transparent government in the world, allegedly. I say 'allegedly' because it is a BBC report.

Tony Bliar says: "Don't blame me for the delay."

We aren't, Tone, we are blaming you for an illegal war, and one you should be in the dock at The Hague for.

So they don't want us to know what was uncovered before we go to the polls to vote.

Which means it detrimental to them all.

So we know that every party currently in Westminster, except the Greens and the UKIP were party to that one. So what should we do come voting day? Assume the worst and vote on it?

I was working in the ME when Saddam invaded Kuwait - 1st Gulf War - and eventually came home, so when GW2 came along I was all for it.

I think that a lot of MPs were thinking the same way. So, when Blair came up with a plausible excuse it was somewhat easy to play along. It is rather ironic that it was Labour rebels who were against Bliar and the Tories who saw him through. That means you are nearly right, Suff, in that they were all in it together, but the LibDems were against. I can't remember if they voted against or abstained.

I suppose that out of the lot of them only Robin Cook and Claire Short came out of it with any sort of honour.

I changed my mind when it became blatantly obvious that Blair lied, and for that I will never forgive him. I would lock him up and throw away the key.

I don't think publishing or not will affect people's voting intentions, to be honest - the vast majority of the population have made their minds up about the war well before now, and the major players are all really political history ....

They voted against and then fell in line when they were beaten.

OK I'll be magnanimous and give them the nod for that one. It doesn't change my other issues with them. It just doesn't damn them quite as much as I would normally. But changing 1,000% no vote to 500% no vote is still a No.

What appears to have happened it that letters were sent to those who could be criticised, in December, in order for a rebuttal.

The first question is Why? Why should they be given that opportunity before the report is published?

The second question is why wasn't a date set for them to respond?

Leaving things open-ended only leads to the assumption that a cover-up is in operation.

Workingman wrote:.

So it drags on, and this from the most transparent government in the world, allegedly. I say 'allegedly' because it is a BBC report.

Tony Bliar says: "Don't blame me for the delay."

We aren't, Tone, we are blaming you for an illegal war, and one you should be in the dock at The Hague for.

Well said as always Frank. With such corrupt lying MPs in Westminster who all cover each other's backsides, and like the Chilcot enquiry its being conducted with the intention to deceive . Problem is 90percent of the British Public don't give a damn.