Sir John Chilcot: establishment creature 'par excellence'!

I was intending to write off Sir John Chilcot as an incompetent, old fool but then it occurred to me that the opposite is true, he is actually exceedingly good at doing what he does, that is, pleasing his masters.  His apprenticeship took place through increasingly high places in the civil service where, no doubt, he learned his crafty arts.  He sat upon, in all senses of the phrase, the Butler Review into British Intelligence prior to Iraq II.  Needless to say, it has never been published in full and whilst the findings criticised the Intelligence Services one of its main operators, John Scarlett, was exonerated and not only promoted to head MI6 but given a knighthood as well.  That's the price of failure in the British establishment!

So, from there as a mere committee man, Sir John Chilcot, was ready, willing and able to accept promotion himself to the chair of the next big enquiry into the whole farrago that was our part in Iraq II.  That was six - SIX! - years ago and still the bloody thing has not been published and now we have been told not to expect anything until the end of the year.  What a comfort that will be for the widows and fatherless children of our servicemen who died in that conflict and who are entitled to some clarification on what passed for thinking in Tony Blair's government at the time.

At this point, I feel impelled to utter a long, loud, personal mea culpa because at the time I was in favour of the war.  My main reason was that I believed what our, by which I mean British and American, intelligence services were saying.  Not that they were offering definitive proof, intelligence rarely works like that, but they had strong indications that Sadaam Hussein, a man who had not hesitated to use chemical and gas weapons against the Kurds, was pursuing a WMD programme.  In addition, I was very happy to see America move in and take over Iraq and, having established their own satrap on the 'throne' in true-blue, British Empire-style, to use the country as a base from which very direct pressure could be exerted on troublesome neighbours.  Alas for my poor judgment, the intel was rubbish and the Americans proved that when it comes to empires they're only good at breaking up other people's - ours, to be exact!  When it comes to building their own and running it they haven't a clue!  My final humiliation was that our army leadership proved utterly useless at urban warfare.  So not my finest hour!

Returning, reluctantly, to the snail-like, or perhaps slug-like is a better analogy, Sir John Chilcot, he is doing better than his previous masters could ever have hoped.  He has strung this ludicrous exercise out far longer than anyone imagined.  'Dim Dave' must be spitting blood because he was rubbing his hands at the thought of several tons of ordure splattering the Labour party just before the election.  Now it will miss by several months, in fact one wonders if, at this rate, anyone involved in the fiasco will still be alive when it is finally published. 

 

 

Comments

[rogerh]

You are right DD, just doing his job. Civil Service selection carefully ensures all senior servants are devoid of the slightest scintilla of initiative or rebellion, it is the British way. Anyway, don't fret, the report will not be worth reading anyway, the media dogs will chew on it for a day or two and find no new meat. Better still, there is no chance Sir John will secrete a cut-down microSD card in his belly button and thus leak the unexpurgated version - pity, 'twould liven a dull day.

[Oswald Thake]

Sir John was selected as 'a safe pair of hands.' He's 'one of us.'
No British Government ever sets up a Court of Enquiry, or a Royal Commission, or a Judicial Review without making it clear what result would be most convenient.
But then, I'm almost as old a cynic as you!

[David Duff]

Alas, all too true - both of you!

[david morris]

"in fact one wonders if, at this rate, anyone involved in the fiasco will still be alive when it is finally published."

As in Brittan & the Elm House file ?

kind regards

[jimmy glesga]

The man was appointed to do a job so he must finish it on his terms and not the baying mob that want to get Blair. The Tories did vote against the war but would have supported it if in power at that time. Blair did the right thing in getting rid of Saddam. It should have happened during Gulf War 1. Saddam invaded Kuwait threatened to invade Saudi and attacked Israel but was for some unknown reason left in power. The West and the Gulf States left the Kurds and some Iraqis to their fate once they secured the oil. That is one of the UN,s most shameful moments among the many.

[Backofanevelope]

The UN mandate was for the liberation of Kuwait. There was no mandate for invading Iraq. It is doing things without a UN mandate that has got us into the current messes including The Ukraine and killing various innocent people by drone.

[David Duff]

Quite so, David, and good to hear from you again.

No time now, Jimmy, to refight old wars, suffice to say that we were lied to by people who weren't even very clever liars. And are you telling me that you would go to war on the word of people like Alistair Campbell whom even a High Court judge called a liar!

I'm not with you, BOE, in allowing the UN to run our foreign and defence policies. We should be free to take our own decisions, right or wrong, not a collection of rogues, thieves, vagabonds and murderers! However, I do expect our 'leaders' to then take responsibility for their decisions - and, no, I'm not holding my breath, thank you for asking!

[jimmy glesga]

David the British armed forces obey orders and have always gone to war for what the elected government considers to be the British interest.

[jimmy glesga]

BOE. Saddam did invade Kuwait and did attack Israel. I would suggest that was a good reason to get rid of Saddam. We will never know what happened in the UN closed sessions that let the scumbag of the hook.

[jimmy glesga]

David do you recall an enquiry into SUEZ?

[David Duff]

No, Jimmy, I don't.

[Cuffleyburgers]

To My shame I too was in favour at the time for exactly the same reasons, influenced partly by the opinion the Economist (which I no longer take) and the UN speech by Colin Powell whom I respected.

More fool me, and fuckemall. But especially Blair.

[David Duff]

Ah well, CB, we can't be right every time, although in my case, just some of the time would be useful!