Tony Blair’s most telling disclosure has already been made. Tony Blair told the BBC that he would have gone to war even if he had known that former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction, conceding that “you would have had to use and deploy different arguments about the nature of the threat.” Perhaps he will go further when he appears before the inquiry, but I wouldn’t bet on it.
Prashar asks about the meeting at Chequers before Crawford. She says Michael Boyce, the then chief of defense staff, did not remember being at the meeting. Blair says he remembers Boyce being there.
The air of anticipation about Blair’s evidence is stoked by Westminster-based journalists and commentators, many of whom have either conveniently forgotten their own support for the war or hope to expunge their complicity with proof that Blair hoodwinked us all. At worst, he is portrayed as a man who cared nothing for questions of morality or legality, so determined was he to fall in behind the U.S. But that is merely to replace one fiction that Saddam was armed to the teeth with WMD with another.