The naivety of the media is astonishing. After decades of official cover-ups, the idea that the Chilcot Report is going to tell the truth is simply absurd. It is highly unlikely to be any more revealing than the pointless Franks Report on the Falklands War, produced by the notorious Bilderberger and German agent Oliver Franks.
Franks, who did his best to aid the German war effort during World War II as a civil servant at the Ministry of Supply, set up at the behest of fellow German agent Sir Edward Bridges, had the rare distinction in Whitehall of having three members of Germany’s Cambridge Spy Ring, Kim Philby, Guy Burgess and Donald Maclean, on his staff! To have employed just one was unusual – to have had all three assigned to him was a significant espionage achievement.
The media appear to have fallen for the age old padding trick. If you want a whitewash, but suspect people are on the alert for one, you drag your inquiry out and make your report as long as possible. It’s been done before, but in fairness no one has ever succeeded quite like the Chilcot team in padding an official document like this one. At a time when there are concerns about the environment, it’s a shameful waste of trees.
Sir John and I have never met. We were due to meet at the Intelligence Conference in Washington in 2005, when I was going to speak about Iraq’s links to 9/11. He pulled out, or, more likely, was ordered out. Even then there was desperate official anxiety to cover up the truth about Saddam’s involvement in 9/11. I offered to give evidence to his inquiry, but they weren’t interested, nor were they interested in any witness in possession of the facts about the involvement of the Iraqi Mukhabarat in 9/11, nor for that matter the earlier WTC1 attack.
There will also be no reference in the report to British involvement in the supply of nuclear components to apartheid South Africa. What’s the connection, I hear you ask? The connection is that three of the South African nukes ended up in Iraq. The apartheid nuclear programme was covert of course. The boys in Pretoria had lots of cash to distribute in connection with their hush-hush nuclear programme and a rather large wodge of it ended up in London.
Some of the people involved in the negotiations had political ambitions and ended up in government, so this was obviously a no-go area for Chilcot. The inquiry only went after soft targets, like Tony Blair, and they won’t have gone after those too hard, since some of them will know where the skeletons are buried, and I don’t just mean Saddam’s.
I tried to save Saddam’s neck, by the way, offering to negotiate clemency if he came clean about 9/11, but he wasn’t interested. Either that, or the intermediary representing him was told to sacrifice him.
You will search the index of the report in vain for an entry relating to the DVD. Since Saddam was a DVD asset and the Ba’ath Party was created by the Abwehr in the 1930s as part of Germany’s drive to secure access to Middle East oil supplies, to write about Iraq without mentioning either the DVD or Germany would be completely absurd. Since the inquiry process has been an absurdity from the beginning, however, there is no reason to suppose that the report will not be in the same vein as the hearings.
Sir John is nothing if not dedicated, with respect. Having been told by the Cabinet Office to produce an absurdity he will have wanted the report to be a complete absurdity.
It was of course German pressure, applied through DVD assets in Washington, which turned Iraq into a tragic farce. Having lost their man Saddam, the Germans had one of the biggest hissy-fits in history. They were determined that the country should descend into chaos and they succeeded. Britain and America will be the fall guys of course, again. Our media and political class are pitifully ignorant of world affairs and easy to fool.
There will be a crescendo of criticism in the media of Britain and America, and of President Bush and Tony Blair. I guarantee there will not be a breath of criticism of Germany, even though the Ba’ath Party was their party, the overthrow of Iraq’s stable constitutional monarchy was their idea and it was Germany which wanted chaos in Iraq after 2003 and got it.
Another No Go area for Chilcot will have been the fabrication of the notorious Abu Ghraib ‘hood’ photo by the Syrian Mukhabarat in Damascus. It was too hot a topic for the Chilcot Inquiry, just as it has been too hot a topic for the mainstream media. The media have back-pedalled since it was exposed as a forgery – when was the last time you saw it in print – but have never apologised for getting Allied soldiers killed by smearing them with a crude Syrian forgery. As one of the Defense Intelligence Agency officers who investigated it told me, “Michael, it’s not even a good forgery”. It wasn’t.
The media also gave wide circulation to even cruder forgeries purporting to show atrocities being committed by British soldiers, without ever apologising to the British Army, indeed they contributed to the shabby cover-up. They also widely circulated false claims of war crimes concerning the death of the Iraqi terrorist Baha Mousa, many of which were ventilated in another farcical official whitewash, sorry inquiry.
I was fairly close to these events, as they happened, and know whereof I speak.
I would advise people against buying the report, even if you live in a lovely little thatched cottage in the country and need some whitewash. I intend no offence at all when I say that had the government or the Cabinet Office wanted a serious inquiry into the Iraq War they would hardly have appointed Sir John Chilcot.