Have your say! "Free Speech" or Muslim bashing? Do you support Iraq troop withdrawal? Iran invasion?
  • Please read our posting policy before adding a comment
  • Target areas: Operation "Anyone But Labour" 2006
  • Thursday, April 28, 2005

    Blair faces new questions on Iraq

    Why did the attorney generals advice on the legality of the invasion of Iraq change in the space of 2 weeks, when it was absolutely clear that there would be no second UN resolution to authorise an invasion? This report from the FT:

    Lord Goldsmith added: “In the light of the latest reporting by Unmovic, you will need to consider very carefully whether the evidence of non-co-operation and non-compliance by Iraq is sufficiently compelling.” Mr Blix told the Financial Times on Wednesday night that, by the time Lord Goldsmith gave this advice, Iraq had become “highly proactive in substance. So later, on I did not complain about any substantial breaches.” Asked whether his findings could be construed as compelling evidence of non-compliance or non-co-operation, he said: “No”.
    The attorney general admitted that UNMOVIC had not judged that Iraq wasn't complying with UN resolutions. See all recent "A Logical Voice" posts


    Post a Comment

    Links to this post:

    Create a Link

    << Home