Iraq: Open letter to Blair from Pauline Hickey - bereaved mother
Friday, May 19, 2006
Prime Minister
You will probably not remember me, I wrote to you several months ago requesting a meeting to discuss your reasons for invading Iraq. Since then I have heard nothing so I presume you are not willing to meet with me to explain your decision to invade Iraq in a war I believe to be illegal. I do have a personal interest in that my son paid the ultimate price.
The truth is out there for all to see, I have found what I believe to be extremely good evidence on the internet. Take a look at David Morrison's website, and books by Phillippe Sands and Mark Danner which are great sources of information. The growing evidence against you Mr. Blair is freely available in the form of minutes of meetings, memoranda and direct quotes you have made. I am surprised you are not facing serious charges as everyone seems to be very aware of the allegations made against you and you have not responded - perhaps you hope they will disappear.
I personally feel you have a moral duty as a renowned committed christian who would presumably have a conscience, and want to meet the families of fallen soldiers to explain your stance. Many thousands of Iraqi civilians and 111 coalition troops have lost their lives during the occupation of Iraq. This is as well as the undisclosed physically injured (not even counted by the MOD, unless life threatening) and now increasingly emerging cases of post traumatic stress.
I would like to ask you:
* On 14 March 2002, Sir David Manning, your Foreign Policy Adviser wrote you a memo, in which he advised you that he had told Condoleeza Rice (who was then President Bush's National Security Adviser) that 'you would not budge in your support for regime change' in Iraq. Like President Bush you were committed to 'regime change'. Is that not true?
If not, you would surely have corrected Sir David Manning's statement, or dismissed him if he was not relaying your wishes or intentions.
During the following 10 months, you said repeatedly that your policy objective was the disarmament of Iraq of it's 'weapons of mass destruction'. For example, on 25 February 2003, you told the House of Commons that Saddam Hussein could stay in power, if Iraq disarmed in accordance with the Security Councils resolutions:
'I detest his regime - I hope most people do, but even now, he could save it by complying with the UN's demand. Even now, we are prepared to go the extra step to achieve disarmament peacefully'.
This statement was untrue, as you has already agreed with President Bush to invade Iraq and overthrow the regime, come what may. This is testified to by memos by David Manning and Christopher Meyer from March 2002, these documents have been in the public domain since September 2004.
During a meeting to discuss Iraq on 23 July 2002, you said:
'--- it would make a big difference politically and legally if Saddam refused to allow the UN inspectors. If the political context were right, people would support regime change'.
You must have been hoping Saddam Hussein would not allow weapons inspectors into Iraq again. Since the disarmament of Iraq by non-military means required UN inspectors to be on the ground in Iraq, I would suggest this would not suit your purpose of regime change.
This was irrespective of what Hans Blix found, or whether the UN Security Council did adopt a further resolution. President Bush is on record telling you, Mr. Blair that if there was no other UN resolution, military action would follow anyway. The date pencilled in was 10 March for the bombing to begin. You told Mr.Bush you were solidly with the President and ready to do what it took to disarm Saddam.
'Weapons of Mass Destruction'
Saddam Hussein's son in law Hussein Kamal, told UN inspectors in August 1995 that all Iraq's weapons and weapons related material had been destroyed in 1991(which has since been confirmed by the Iraq Survey Group) On 18 March 2003, you told the House of Commons about other disclosures by Hussein Kamal, but not this crucial one.
Why not?
During the same speech, you gave a list of weapons and weapon related material that UN inspectors deemed unaccounted for when they withdrew from Iraq in 1998. You failed to enlighten the House of Commons the fact that being unaccounted for didn't mean they still were in existence. Why not?
You also failed to tell the House of Commons that UNMOVIC's opinion that of any Sarin, VX or botulinum toxin would no longer be effective as warfare agents, even if they had been in existence. I would suggest you again failed to relay this vital information to the House of Commons. (I would suggest looking at the UNMOVIC document, Unresolved Disarmament Issues)
The Intelligence Services told you before the invasion of Iraq, that it was their opinion, that the threat from al Qaida and associated groups would be heightened by military action against Iraq. Again why did you not tell Parliament about this Mr. Blair? The subsequent London bombings have confirmed this, and more totally unnecessary deaths.
Do you feel responsible for this also?
* I would also question, why you misled us about what M. Jacques Chirac had indicated and his feelings about the invasion of Iraq. Documentation would confirm he wanted a further period of inspection to continue before considering force against Iraq.
Prime Minister, it appears to me you had your own agenda for the invasion of Iraq. Since then you have continued to mislead and deny any misdemeanors, I am sure history will indeed reveal the truth, but it would have at least shown you possessed compassion if you agreed to meet with the families who have lost loved ones in Iraq.
Pauline Hickey
Mother of Sgt, Christian Hickey 1st Battalion Coldstream Guards died 18/10/05 in this unjust war.
Military Families Against the War Blog
Prime Minister
You will probably not remember me, I wrote to you several months ago requesting a meeting to discuss your reasons for invading Iraq. Since then I have heard nothing so I presume you are not willing to meet with me to explain your decision to invade Iraq in a war I believe to be illegal. I do have a personal interest in that my son paid the ultimate price.
The truth is out there for all to see, I have found what I believe to be extremely good evidence on the internet. Take a look at David Morrison's website, and books by Phillippe Sands and Mark Danner which are great sources of information. The growing evidence against you Mr. Blair is freely available in the form of minutes of meetings, memoranda and direct quotes you have made. I am surprised you are not facing serious charges as everyone seems to be very aware of the allegations made against you and you have not responded - perhaps you hope they will disappear.
I personally feel you have a moral duty as a renowned committed christian who would presumably have a conscience, and want to meet the families of fallen soldiers to explain your stance. Many thousands of Iraqi civilians and 111 coalition troops have lost their lives during the occupation of Iraq. This is as well as the undisclosed physically injured (not even counted by the MOD, unless life threatening) and now increasingly emerging cases of post traumatic stress.
I would like to ask you:
* On 14 March 2002, Sir David Manning, your Foreign Policy Adviser wrote you a memo, in which he advised you that he had told Condoleeza Rice (who was then President Bush's National Security Adviser) that 'you would not budge in your support for regime change' in Iraq. Like President Bush you were committed to 'regime change'. Is that not true?
If not, you would surely have corrected Sir David Manning's statement, or dismissed him if he was not relaying your wishes or intentions.
During the following 10 months, you said repeatedly that your policy objective was the disarmament of Iraq of it's 'weapons of mass destruction'. For example, on 25 February 2003, you told the House of Commons that Saddam Hussein could stay in power, if Iraq disarmed in accordance with the Security Councils resolutions:
'I detest his regime - I hope most people do, but even now, he could save it by complying with the UN's demand. Even now, we are prepared to go the extra step to achieve disarmament peacefully'.
This statement was untrue, as you has already agreed with President Bush to invade Iraq and overthrow the regime, come what may. This is testified to by memos by David Manning and Christopher Meyer from March 2002, these documents have been in the public domain since September 2004.
During a meeting to discuss Iraq on 23 July 2002, you said:
'--- it would make a big difference politically and legally if Saddam refused to allow the UN inspectors. If the political context were right, people would support regime change'.
You must have been hoping Saddam Hussein would not allow weapons inspectors into Iraq again. Since the disarmament of Iraq by non-military means required UN inspectors to be on the ground in Iraq, I would suggest this would not suit your purpose of regime change.
This was irrespective of what Hans Blix found, or whether the UN Security Council did adopt a further resolution. President Bush is on record telling you, Mr. Blair that if there was no other UN resolution, military action would follow anyway. The date pencilled in was 10 March for the bombing to begin. You told Mr.Bush you were solidly with the President and ready to do what it took to disarm Saddam.
'Weapons of Mass Destruction'
Saddam Hussein's son in law Hussein Kamal, told UN inspectors in August 1995 that all Iraq's weapons and weapons related material had been destroyed in 1991(which has since been confirmed by the Iraq Survey Group) On 18 March 2003, you told the House of Commons about other disclosures by Hussein Kamal, but not this crucial one.
Why not?
During the same speech, you gave a list of weapons and weapon related material that UN inspectors deemed unaccounted for when they withdrew from Iraq in 1998. You failed to enlighten the House of Commons the fact that being unaccounted for didn't mean they still were in existence. Why not?
You also failed to tell the House of Commons that UNMOVIC's opinion that of any Sarin, VX or botulinum toxin would no longer be effective as warfare agents, even if they had been in existence. I would suggest you again failed to relay this vital information to the House of Commons. (I would suggest looking at the UNMOVIC document, Unresolved Disarmament Issues)
The Intelligence Services told you before the invasion of Iraq, that it was their opinion, that the threat from al Qaida and associated groups would be heightened by military action against Iraq. Again why did you not tell Parliament about this Mr. Blair? The subsequent London bombings have confirmed this, and more totally unnecessary deaths.
Do you feel responsible for this also?
* I would also question, why you misled us about what M. Jacques Chirac had indicated and his feelings about the invasion of Iraq. Documentation would confirm he wanted a further period of inspection to continue before considering force against Iraq.
Prime Minister, it appears to me you had your own agenda for the invasion of Iraq. Since then you have continued to mislead and deny any misdemeanors, I am sure history will indeed reveal the truth, but it would have at least shown you possessed compassion if you agreed to meet with the families who have lost loved ones in Iraq.
Pauline Hickey
Mother of Sgt, Christian Hickey 1st Battalion Coldstream Guards died 18/10/05 in this unjust war.
Military Families Against the War Blog
posted by exoplanet at 4:38 PM
<< Home