The Chilcot enquiry

The primary purpose of the Chilcot enquiry was to discern what lessons can be learned from the Iraq debacle, rather than act in the capacity of a judicial inquiry seeking to apportion blame.

Thursday, 28th July 2016, 6:15 am
Updated Thursday, 28th July 2016, 7:19 am

Indeed, had the latter been the case, then, it’s clear the main protagonists would have refused to take part; presumably for fear they would incriminate themselves.

One lesson that can seemingly be drawn from Chilcot, is that the justification for war was based upon “evidence” manufactured (ie “sexed up”) for the purpose of justifying the predetermined decision to invade Iraq in league with the USA and hence persuade the wider populus to wholeheartedly support it, a strategy which seems to be reminiscent of government behaviour down through the ages.

For if governments want their predetermined plans to be adopted, they have no qualms about producing “evidence” of rather dubious validity to suit their purpose; a strategy which Quangos and private sector organisations have an increasing tendency to mimic nowadays.

Sign up to our daily newsletter

The i newsletter cut through the noise

Any person and/or group that refuses to support and hence adopt the predetermined plan, is ruthlessly spun against in the form of toxic briefings as a means of blackening names and reputations.

The same sort of process can now be witnessed in the Labour Party, whereby the parliamentary faction in particular of Old New Labour, seek to dump a leader elected fairly and squarely by a large majority of the membership, under rules designed and supported by the faction that now seeks to overturn the decision come to, simply because it turned out to be contrary to the one they expected to achieve.

Nevertheless, despite the aforementioned findings of Chilcot, the Old New Labour faction still insist in engaging in perpetrating what amounts to a modern-day medieval mentality witch hunt against a duly elected leader commanding increasing popular public support.

This begs the question as to what’s the point of inquiries?

What’s the point of people having their say if politicians and decision makers will only pay heed to what it is they want to hear?

It seems that the political/governmental arena in this country is becoming increasingly akin to an Augean Stable in severe need of a Herculean effort to clear it out?

Michael Parker

Roberthsaw Crescent, Deepcar, Sheffield, S36