It’s not being reported in the American press for reasons that any conspiracy theorist would love to debate. I’d rather say that I just cannot explain why this story doesn’t simply trump all the runaway bride and Michael Jackson blather that is on the air and in the papers.

I’m talking about the fact that Tony Blair and the US administration planned for the Iraq war nearly 8 months before we went to war. His administration even says that the US was going to fix the evidence and facts to fit the policy. The decision was already made 8 months before the war started. Yet, the British and the Americans governments continued to make a false case for the war simply to implement the plan they had already created.

All of these claims are based on the London Times report of a document which contains the minutes of a high-level secret meeting which Tony Blair attended and discussed these and more damning items. This document contains such gems as:

• Military action was now seen as inevitable.
• Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.
• There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.
• The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun “spikes of activity” to put pressure on the regime. (Note that this is July 23, 2002).
• It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran.
• We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.
• The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult.

How can this information be ignored by the journalists of the US? This information sends me into an absolute outrage, yet somehow the Bush administration has created an environment where no one in the press (at least, mainstream press) is willing to cover this story in any more powerful way than as a roadbump in Tony Blair’s reelection bid.

I recently saw Tom Smothers speak. He was not talking about this particular incident, but he did discuss the greater culture of silence that seems to have pervaded both the press and the public compared to the fairly repressive times in which his TV show was canceled for its anti-war and anti-administration content. He told the audience, “I don’t want to be a good German.” It’s inflammatory and provocative, as a good speech should be, but I don’t think he’s too far from reality.

What Bush is complicit in here is a criminal attack on another sovereign nation and he should be impeached and put to face the highest of all punishments for this crime.